Bauckneht M, Piva R, Sambuceti G, Grossi F, Morbelli S. Evaluation of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors: Is there a role for positron emission tomography? World J Radiol 2017; 9(2): 27-33 [PMID: 28298962 DOI: 10.4329/wjr.v9.i2.27]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Silvia Morbelli, MD, PhD, Nuclear Medicine Unit, IRCCS San Martino-IST, University of Genoa, Largo R. Benzi 10, 16132 Genova, Italy. silviadaniela.morbelli@hsanmartino.it
Research Domain of This Article
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging
Article-Type of This Article
Editorial
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
World J Radiol. Feb 28, 2017; 9(2): 27-33 Published online Feb 28, 2017. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v9.i2.27
Evaluation of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors: Is there a role for positron emission tomography?
Matteo Bauckneht, Roberta Piva, Gianmario Sambuceti, Francesco Grossi, Silvia Morbelli
Matteo Bauckneht, Roberta Piva, Gianmario Sambuceti, Silvia Morbelli, Nuclear Medicine Unit, IRCCS San Martino-IST, University of Genoa, 16132 Genoa, Italy
Francesco Grossi, Lung Cancer Unit, IRCCS San Martino-IST, University of Genoa, 16132 Genoa, Italy
Author contributions: Morbelli S conceived and designed the study; Bauckneht M and Morbelli S drafted the manuscript; Bauckneht M and Piva R prepared the tables and figures; Sambuceti G and Grossi F critically revised the manuscript; all the authors approved the final version of the paper.
Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors have no conflicts of interest related to this publication to disclose.
Open-Access: This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Correspondence to: Silvia Morbelli, MD, PhD, Nuclear Medicine Unit, IRCCS San Martino-IST, University of Genoa, Largo R. Benzi 10, 16132 Genova, Italy. silviadaniela.morbelli@hsanmartino.it
Telephone: +39-010-5552026 Fax: +39-010-5556911
Received: August 20, 2016 Peer-review started: August 23, 2016 First decision: October 21, 2016 Revised: November 2, 2016 Accepted: November 27, 2016 Article in press: November 29, 2016 Published online: February 28, 2017 Processing time: 191 Days and 12 Hours
Core Tip
Core tip: In the clinical practice, the radiological interpretation of immunotherapy effects represents a huge challenge at single patient level. However, although the computed tomography-based response evaluation for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs) is feasible thanks to the introduction of immune-related response criteria, very few data are available for the potential role of 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET). Due to the intrinsic nature of FDG accumulation pathophysiology, it might be central to test the complex and variegated response to ICPIs by means of PET. Finally, PET might offer a new insight into the biology of ICPIs thanks to a growing number of non-invasive immune-diagnostic approaches based on non-FDG tracers.
