Assessment of bone lesions with 18 F-FDG PET/MRI in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Journal and index pages often block iframe embedding. This reader keeps the evidence details in Orthonotes and leaves the source page one click away.

Abstract

[Indexed for MEDLINE] 15. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2026 May;53(6):3686-3698. doi: 10.1007/s00259-025-07650-z. Epub 2025 Dec 17. Head-to-head comparison of (18)F-FAP-2286 PET/CT and (18)F-FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis and staging of clear cell renal cell carcinoma: a prospective study. Cui Y(1), Wang S(1), Liu Y(1), Li X(2), Li Y(3), Li X(4). Author information: (1)Department of Nuclear Medicine, The First Hospital of China Medical University, 155 Nanjing St, Shenyang, 110001, Liaoning, China. (2)Central Research Institute, United Imaging Healthcare, 2258 Chengbei Road, Shanghai, 201807, China. (3)Department of Nuclear Medicine, The First Hospital of China Medical University, 155 Nanjing St, Shenyang, 110001, Liaoning, China. ymli2001@163.com. (4)Department of Nuclear Medicine, The First Hospital of China Medical University, 155 Nanjing St, Shenyang, 110001, Liaoning, China. lixuenacmunm@163.com. PURPOSE: This research was designed to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy, lesion detection, and clinical management impact of 18F-FAP-2286 PET/CT versus 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). METHODS: Participants with confirmed or suspected ccRCC diagnoses were prospectively included in our study. All patients underwent 18F-FAP-2286 and 18F-FDG PET/CT. The evaluation of diagnostic performance was conducted utilizing pathology and clinical follow-up as the reference standards. The quantitative analysis included the SUVmax, TBR, FTV/MTV, and TLF/TLG. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients with initial stage (n = 20)/recurrent (n = 2) ccRCC underwent 18F-FAP-2286 and 18F-FDG PET/CT. Compared with 18F-FDG PET/CT, 18F-FAP-2286 PET/CT had a greater TBR for primary ccRCC lesions [2.8 (1.9–5.4) vs.1.6 (1.1–3.8); P = 0.019], whereas the SUVmax did not significantly differ [8.4 (4.7–17.2) vs.6.6 (4.9–19.4); P = 0.965]. With respect to metastatic lymph nodes, 18F-FAP-2286 PET/CT had a higher SUVmax [13.7 (10.8–18.3) vs. 11.0 (7.3–16.4); P = 0.043] and TBR [10.4 (8.0-13.3) vs. 5.7 (3.4–8.7); P