ライフサイエンスコーパス: FMISO

1 ith glioblastoma underwent T1Gd, T2, and 18F-FMISO-11 studies preceded surgical resection or biopsy,

2 8F-FMISO images were scaled to the blood 18F-FMISO activity to create tumor-to-blood ratio (T/B) imag

3 that the distribution of hypoxia seen on 18F-FMISO is correlated spatially and quantitatively with th

4 assessed by 18F-fluoromisonidazole PET (18F-FMISO).

5 The 18F-FMISO images were scaled to the blood 18F-FMISO activity

6 imetry were measured in patients during [18F]FMISO and 15O PET imaging.

7 Fluorine 18-labeled fluoromisonidazole ([18F]FMISO), a PET tracer that undergoes irreversible selecti

8 The organ doses for [18F]FMISO are comparable to those associated with other comm

9 cally different from those reported for [18F]FMISO in the same cell lines (700-1500 ppm).

10 tabolites by 4 h; comparable values for [18F]FMISO were 36% and 57%, respectively.

11 gested that the threshold for increased [18F]FMISO trapping is probably 15 mm Hg or lower.

12 ents following intravenous injection of [18F]FMISO.

13 asma of mice injected with [18F]FETA or [18F]FMISO.

14 nitroimidazole is metabolized less than [18F]FMISO.

15 oxygen dependency of binding similar to [18F]FMISO in vitro and displaying less retention in liver an

16 tudy included 10 patients who underwent [18F]FMISO and 15O PET within 1 to 8 days of severe or modera

17 orts of 10 healthy volunteers underwent [18F]FMISO or 15O PET.

18 Hypoxic volumes were quantified from each FMISO-PET scan following standard techniques.

19 Hypoxia, indicated by (18)F-FMISO accumulation, was higher in the SaOS-2/Caprin-1 an

20 ed significantly different volumes for (18)F-FMISO and (18)F-FLT (P < 0.001).

21 roducibility of the visual analyses of (18)F-FMISO and (18)F-FLT PET/CT images was demonstrated using

22 e 0.81 for (18)F-FDG and 0.77 for both (18)F-FMISO and (18)F-FLT using the 2-level scale.

23 nterobserver agreement was low for the (18)F-FMISO and (18)F-FLT volume measurements.

24 SUVmax of the aorta could be used for (18)F-FMISO and (18)F-FLT.

25 (18)F-FMISO and (18)F-HX4 had similar intermediate tumor uptak

26 were 0.13 and 0.19, respectively, for (18)F-FMISO and 0.2 and 0.3, respectively, for (18)F-FLT.

27 maximum SUV (SUVmax) of the aorta for (18)F-FMISO and 1.3 x SUVmax of the muscle for (18)F-FLT.

28 animals, using the hypoxic cell tracer (18)F-FMISO and the reporter substrate (124)I-FIAU, yielded si

29 administration of 42.1 +/- 3.9 MBq of (18)F-FMISO by tail vein injection.

30 Variable (18)F-FMISO delivery was observed across lesions, as indicated

31 (18)F-FMISO distribution volume deviated from the expected val

32 1/k2, and k3-surrogates for perfusion, (18)F-FMISO distribution volume, and hypoxia-mediated entrapme

33 umor hypoxia (k3), perfusion (K1), and (18)F-FMISO distribution volume.

34 cancer patients underwent 0- to 30-min (18)F-FMISO dPET in a customized immobilization mask, followed

35 0 min, facilitating the translation of (18)F-FMISO dPET into the clinic.

36 Conclusion:(18)F-FMISO dPET provides the data necessary to generate param

37 udy, pharmacokinetic analysis (PKA) of (18)F-FMISO dynamic PET extended to 3 h after injection is rep

38 (18)F-FMISO equilibrates in normoxic tissues but is retained u

39 zole was coadministered with the first (18)F-FMISO injection, and 2-(2-nitro-1H-imidazol-1-yl)-N-(2,2

40 Conclusion:(18)F-FMISO kinetic modeling reveals a more detailed response

41 These findings support the use of (18)F-FMISO kinetic modeling to more accurately characterize t

42 We derived average values of (18)F-FMISO kinetic parameters for NSCLC lesions as well as fo

43 resulted in a marked reduction in the (18)F-FMISO mean standardized uptake value (SUV(mean)) in appr

44 d to delineate the volume of increased (18)F-FMISO or (18)F-FLT uptake.

45 Two hundred twenty-three (18)F-FMISO patient studies had detectable surrogate blood reg

46 r), CT (of the anatomy), and late-time (18)F-FMISO PET (of the T/B) and parametric images of K(i) (po

47 Simple static analysis of (18)F-FMISO PET captures both the intensity (TBmax) and the sp

48 (18)F-FMISO PET could distinguish between different tumor resp

49 a in inflammation using (18)F-FAZA and (18)F-FMISO PET imaging represents a promising new tool for un

50 diagnosed patients underwent a dynamic (18)F-FMISO PET scan before chemotherapy or radiotherapy.

51 (18)F-FMISO PET was performed 3 h before and 24 h after treatm

52 Serial dynamic (18)F-FMISO PET was performed to investigate changes in tumor

53 the present study, static and dynamic (18)F-FMISO PET were performed with mice bearing either U87MG

54 Dynamic (18)F-FMISO PET with pharmacokinetics modeling, complementary

55 ling further monitored the kinetics of (18)F-FMISO retention to hypoxic sites after treatment.

56 3-min static (18) F-FDG and a dynamic (18)F-FMISO scan lasting 168 +/- 15 min.

57 Patients underwent 20-min (18)F-FMISO scanning during the 90- to 140-min interval after

58 ciated with DFS when adjusting for the (18)F-FMISO status.

59 However, a reduction in (18)F-FMISO SUV(mean) after DMXAA treatment was indicative of

60 ignificant reduction of mean voxelwise (18)F-FMISO TBR, K1, and K1/k2 in both the 2-d and the 7-d gro

61 re analyzed, the observed reduction in (18)F-FMISO uptake after treatment with cediranib may be mista

62 clarify the ambiguity in interpreting (18)F-FMISO uptake and improve the characterization of lesions

63 discrepancy between k3 maps and total (18)F-FMISO uptake and reducing the dynamic range of total (18

64 y an overlap analysis of the volume of (18)F-FMISO uptake and the volumes of the high CBV regions and

65 nd reducing the dynamic range of total (18)F-FMISO uptake for quantifying the degree of hypoxia.

66 (18)F-FMISO uptake in NSCLC patients is strongly associated wi

67 The (18)F-FMISO uptake on PET/CT was assessed by trained experts.

68 The level and location of hypoxia ((18)F-FMISO uptake, evaluated by tumor-to-blood [T/B] ratio),

69 evertheless exhibited relatively lower (18)F-FMISO uptake.

70 All lesions showed distinct (18)F-FMISO uptake.

71 ibration between the blood and unbound (18)F-FMISO was rapid in all tumors.

72 moral distributions of (124)I-FIAU and (18)F-FMISO were similar, and eGFP, pimonidazole, EF5, and CA9

73 oxia tracers (18)F-fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) and (18)F-fluoroazomycinarabinoside ((18)F-FAZA).

74 rfusion with (18)F-fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) dynamic PET (dPET) in head and neck cancer.

75 s of (18)F-labeled fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) dynamic PET to assist the identification of regio

76 (18)F-fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) is the most widely used PET agent for imaging hyp

77 assessed by (18)F-fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) PET and conventional and perfusion MRI before sur

78 s to evaluate (18)F-fluromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) PET for monitoring the tumor response to the anti

79 (18)F-fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) PET is a noninvasive, quantitative imaging techni

80 with dynamic (18)F-fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) PET may allow for an improved response assessment

81 s with significant (18)F-misonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) uptake in patients with non-small cell lung carci

82 ((18)F-FDG), (18)F-fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO), and 3'-deoxy-3'-(18)F-fluorothymidine ((18)F-FLT

83 PET imaging with (18)F-FDG, (18)F-FMISO, and (18)F-fluoride was performed in these mouse m

84 ectively, 0.59 for (18)F-FDG, 0.43 for (18)F-FMISO, and 0.44 for (18)F-FLT using the 5-level scale; t

85 Ten (18)F-FDG, ten (18)F-FMISO, and ten (18)F-FLT PET/CT examinations were perfor

86 the HT29-9HRE xenograft: (124)I-FIAU, (18)F-FMISO, Hoechst (perfusion), lectin-TRITC (functional blo

87 ed perfusion and therefore delivery of (18)F-FMISO, rather than a reduction in tumor hypoxia.

88 DFS was longer in the (18)F-FMISO-negative patients (P = 0.004).

89 ng RECIST 1.1 (17/34 responders in the (18)F-FMISO-positive group).

90 In (18)F-FMISO-positive patients, the contours of the hypoxic are

91 ncluded, 54 were included, and 34 were (18)F-FMISO-positive, 24 of whom received escalated doses of u

92 adiotracers ((18)F-fluoromisonidazole [(18)F-FMISO], (18)F-flortanidazole [(18)F-HX4], (18)F-fluoroaz

93 ((18)F-FDG, (18)F-fluoromisonidazole [(18)F-FMISO], and (18)F-fluoride) in preclinical mouse models

94 Fluoromisonidazole (FMISO), labeled with the positron emitter 18F, is a usef

95 ns of [18F]FETA and [18F]fluoromisonidazole (FMISO) at 2 and 4 h postinjection in C3H mice bearing KH

96 lar proliferation, (18)F-fluoromisonidazole (FMISO) for tissue hypoxia, and (11)C-verapamil for P-gly

97 reoperatively with (18)F-fluoromisonidazole (FMISO)-PET and serial gadolinium-enhanced T1- and T2-wei

98 studies to help define the radiation risk of FMISO-PET imaging.

99 ined tumor volume, and the mean intensity on FMISO-PET scaled to the blood activity of the tracer (me