Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
    • Special Issues
  • Journal Metrics
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
In Vivo
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
In Vivo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
    • Special Issues
  • Journal Metrics
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Visit iiar on Facebook
  • Follow us on Linkedin
Review ArticleClinical StudiesR

Diagnostics of Neuroendocrine Tumours

M. HODOLIČ, J. FETTICH, E. BANTI, S. CHONDROGIANNIS, A. AL-NAHHAS and D. RUBELLO
In Vivo September 2010, 24 (5) 771-774;
M. HODOLIČ
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J. FETTICH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
E. BANTI
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
S. CHONDROGIANNIS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
A. AL-NAHHAS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
D. RUBELLO
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: domenico.rubello{at}libero.it
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) are rare pathologies which origin from neuroectodermic and endodermic cells and that can produce peptides and amino acids. About 70% of NETs derive from gastroenterohepatic (GEP) system and the other 30% from the different sites through the body. They are distinguished into single and multiple localizations and also into sporadic, familial multiple endocrine-related forms and recurrent forms. Moreover, when they produce hormones they usually are symptomatic; yet, they are characterized by the synthesis and secretion in the blood stream of several tumor-specific markers or can express somatostatin receptors in their cellular surface. The diagnosis and follow-up of NETs rely on laboratory studies, histopathology and the combination of anatomical and functional imaging, with the latter being the main method for monitoring response to therapy. In recent years, nuclear medicine has contributed to the impressive development of the knowledge of NETs in terms of biology (receptor scintigraphy), pharmacology (development of new tracers) and therapy (radiometabolic therapy). Nuclear medicine procedures for diagnosis and treatment of NETs are based on the biological properties of these tumours: the expression of somatostatin receptors. Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy not only has a crucial role in diagnosis and staging of NETs, but also in assessing suitability for treatment with cold and radiolabelled somatostatin analogues, as well as in monitoring response to treatment and detecting recurrent disease. In conventional nuclear medicine, the two most important functional imaging modalities are 111In-octrescan and 123I-MIBG. Over the last 5 years, due to the development of new tracers, such as 68Ga labelled-DOTA-peptides PET and 18F-DOPA, PET has also been employed with significant benefits in the diagnosis and management of NETs.

  • Neuroendocrine tumours
  • diagnosis
  • somatostatin
  • scintigraphy
  • PET-DOTA peptides
  • short review

Suspicion of the NETs or discovery of a known tumour is based on a patient's family history, clinical manifestations, laboratory studies, histopathology and imaging studies.

Laboratory Studies and Histopathology

For each tumour type, characteristic clinical symptoms should lead to the measurement of specific markers such as serotonin, insulin, glucagon, gastrin, VIP, and somatostatin. An excessive amount of hormones leads to typical clinical signs. The type of symptoms will depend on where the tumour originated, where it may have spread to, and whether it produces a hormone such as serotonin. Carcinoid tumours produce excessive amounts of serotonin (1). When serotonin is broken down in the liver, it is excreted as [5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid (5HIAA)] in the urine. A 24-hour urine collection is needed to check whether there are raised levels of 5HIAA. To establish the diagnosis of insulinoma a 12- to 72-hour fast is recommended, and a glucagon test may also be informative (2). For the diagnosis of gastrinoma, measurement of basal and maximal gastric acid output is recommended to exclude secondary hypergastrinaemia (3).

In histopathology, special stains are performed on the tumour for chromogranin A, neuron-specific enolase (NSE), protein gene product (PGP 9.5), Ki-67 protein, gastrin and other gut hormones. Chromogranin A serves as a sensitive but non-specific tumour marker in non-functioning and in functioning endocrine tumours. It is localized in secretory granules of neurons and endocrine cells and it is regarded as a powerful universal marker for NETs (4, 5). Excessively elevated levels (>1000 pg/ml) indicate unfavorable prognosis (6). NSE is one of the five isoenzymes of the glycolytic enzyme, enolase. This enzyme is released into the cerebrospinal fluid when neural tissue is injured. There is evidence that the level of serum NSE correlates with tumour burden (7-9). An increase occurs more commonly and is at higher levels in the advanced stages rather than in the limited stage disease (9). PGP 9.5 is a soluble protein isolated from brain and is a general marker for neuronal and neuroendocrine tissue (10). Ki-67 protein is an important marker of cell proliferation and this should be assessed on all histological samples. Studies have shown a strong correlation between proliferation rates and clinical outcome in a variety of tumour types, and measurement of cell proliferative activity is one of the important prognostic markers (11).

Morphologic Imaging Techniques

The localization of NETs in the gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) tract might be difficult, especially if the tumours are small, therefore they are often not found. The preoperative diagnosis is mandatory for surgery and determing the extent of surgical resection (12). Nowadays, several anatomical imaging techniques are used: conventional X-ray, ultrasound (US) (endosonography, EUS; contrast-enhanced sonography; combined with colour Doppler sonography, intraoperative sonography), computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP), magnetic resonance cholangio-pancreatography, CT-enteroclysis and arteriography (13). Conventional X-ray is still very useful to study particular tumour sites (e.g. thorax). US has variable validity depending on the site of disease (excellent results have been obtained in detecting liver metastases). US generally shows more detail in children than in adults. Endosonogrphy is useful in the identification of intraluminal tumours and has a very high accuracy for gastric and pancreatic tumours or when performed intraoperatively. Intraoperative palpation combined with intraoperative US has been shown to be more sensitive than other conventional techniques in the diagnosis of small pancreatic tumours, particularly insulinomas (14). Colour Doppler and power Doppler US combined with a computed image processing system allow qualitative and quantitative assessment of tumour vascularity. CT has better specificity than US and defines the anatomical borders of the lesion more clearly. It is essential in preoperative staging. Multi-slice CT allows multi-phase scanning (native, arterial, venous phase), which is mandatory to study liver lesions, for instance. Moreover, it improves the quality of three-dimensional reconstruction, when needed, and the accurate assessment of tumour size and extent (15). MRI has been an important development during the past years. It clearly shows the relationship of masses and major vascular structures by defining the size and extent of soft tissue lesions and accurately depicting displacement and invasion of adjacent organs. MRI and CT can identify larger primary tumours and organ metastases (16). Due to the small size of the tumours, morphological imaging techniques are sometimes unsuccessful at identifying sites of primary tumours or metastatic spread, which are both crucial for selection of the most appropriate therapy, such as surgery, radiofrequency ablation or other medical treatment. Therefore a combination of functional and morphological imaging is needed for initial diagnosis, localization of the tumour, staging, monitoring of the progress of the disease and assessment of the response to treatment.

Functional Imaging Techniques

At present, it is impossible to plan the management of a patient affected by NETs without performing nuclear medicine examinations. Functional imaging techniques used in the evaluation of NETs is somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS), whole body planar scintigraphy, WB and single photon-emission computerized tomography (SPECT), and positron-emission tomography (PET). SPECT imaging can visualize more lesions than planar imaging, so it is mandatory for an accurate evaluation (17). Nuclear medicine procedures for the diagnosis and treatment of NETs are based on the biological properties of these tumours, namely the expression of somatostatin receptors. Somatostatin, also known as growth hormone-inhibiting hormone (GHIH) or somatotropin release-inhibiting factor (SRIF), is a small peptide hormone of 14 amino acids that regulates the endocrine system and affects neurotransmission and cell proliferation via interaction with G-protein-coupled somatostatin receptors (18). Somatostatin receptors (SSTR) are integral membrane glycoproteins that are distributed in a variety of tissues throughout the body. Molecular studies have revealed the existence of five distinct somatostatin receptor types with different tissue distribution. These receptors have been cloned and chronologically termed SSTR1, SSTR2 (with 2 splice variants: SSTR2A and SSTR2B), SSTR3, SSTR4, and SSTR5. Many NETs are known to express SSTRs with varying intensity. The most common subtypes of SSTRs of NETs are SSTR2 and SSTR5, and their expression can be quite elevated (19, 20). Since NETs are well differentiated, they usually overexpress somatostatine receptors.

In patients with SSTRs-positive pathology, SSTR scintigraphy is a highly sensitive diagnostic method to localize NETs and can provide a functional assessment of the disease state. In addition, scintigraphy can add specificity and increased confidence in a diagnosis of a mass seen on anatomical imaging techniques. It is the most sensitive test for metastatic spread of NETs (21). Several somatostatin analogues have been developed both for imaging as well as therapy of NETs. Octreotide is a somatostatin analogue consisting of eight amino acids. Pentreotide (an octreotid analogue) has been shown to bind to SSTRs on both tumour and non-tumour sites throughout the body. The agent is labelled with 111In-DTPA (111In-diethylene triamine pentaacetic acid), commercially available as Octreoscan® Mallinckrodt. Octreotide is excreted almost exclusively by the kidneys (via glomerular filtration) with 85-90% of the dose recovered in the urine in the first 24 hours. Uptake in the kidneys is for the most part from reabsorption of the radiolabeled peptide in the proximal renal tubular cells via megalin receptors after glomerular filtration. There is little hepatobiliary excretion (2-10%), but bowel activity may sometimes be visualized on delayed 24 hour images, and a bowel preparation should be given prior to imaging. The sensitivity of 111In pentetreotide may be reduced in patients concurrently receiving therapeutic doses of octreotide acetate (Sandostatin®) for control of symptoms from certain tumours, although this has not been identified in clinical trials. It is nonetheless recommended that octreotide therapy be withheld for at least 24 to 72 hours prior to the examination, if possible (23). Somatostatin analogues can be radiolabelled not only with 111In (e.g. Octreoscan®) but also with 99mTc e.g. 99mTc-EDDA/HYNIC-TOC ([99mTc-EDDA/HYNIC-D-Phe 1, Tyr 3] octreotide) (24). Diagnosis, localization and tumour spread can be determined using 99mTc-EDDA/HYNIC-TOC at least as confidently as using 111In-octreotide. Its advantages are availability, low cost, decreased absorbed dose for the patients and high quality of scintigraphic images (24). Scintigraphy with 111In or 99mTc-labelled somatostatin analogues has become the main imaging technique for NETs, particularly those expressing a high density of SSTRs. Combined with SPECT, it is currently the first choice imaging technique for these tumours.

PET and PET Radiotracers in Diagnosis of NETs

PET studies reflect the different metabolic pathways of NETs, such as glucose metabolism (18F-fluorodeoxyglucose), the uptake of hormone precursors [11C-5-hydroxytryptophan (11C-5HTP); 11C- or 18F-dihydroxyphenylalanine; 18F-fluorodopamine], the expression of receptors (68Ga-labelled somatostatin analogues), as well as the synthesis, storage, and release of hormones (11C-hydroxyephedrine and others) (25, 26, 27).

18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) PET with localizing or diagnostic CT, is the most common technique combining functional and morphological information in oncology today. Uptake of the FDG depends on intensity of glycolysis in the malignant cell; this is rather low in highly differentiated and slowly growing tumours, such as NETs. Therefore, FDG PET is not the ideal diagnostic method for evaluation of NETs. It can be useful, however, in demonstrating that dedifferentiation occurred; this has an important prognostic implication and can lead to change in therapy (chemotherapy). Recently, 18F-deoxyphenylalanine (18F-DOPA) PET has emerged as a new diagnostic tool for the imaging of NETs. 18F-DOPA is a radiolabelled amino acid precursor of dopamine that was originally synthesized for the in vivo evaluation of receptor uptake in the caudate and putamen in Parkinson's disease. In oncology it has been employed for the detection of carcinoid, pheochromocytoma, neuroblastoma, medullary thyroid carcinoma, microcytoma, carotid glomus tumours and melanoma. Hoegerle et al. (26, 28) compared whole-body 18F-DOPA PET with 18F-FDG PET, 111In-octreotide and morphologic imaging (CT and/or MRI) in patients with gastrointestinal carcinoid tumours. 18F-DOPA PET had the highest sensitivity for detecting the primary tumour and lymph node metastases. The study also examined the role of 18F-DOPA PET/CT in comparison to 111In-octreotide scintigraphy in patients with gastroenteropancreatic NETs. 18F-DOPA PET/CT identified the primary tumour in all patients with negative or inconclusive conventional imaging and 111In-octreotide scintigraphy and was able to detect additional unsuspected lesions, the majority of which were confirmed as metastatic deposits. Management was changed in 84% of patients who underwent 18F-DOPA PET/CT (29).

Many NETs, including some non-functional tumours, take up L-dihydroxyphenylalanine (L-DOPA) and 5-hydroxytryptophan (5-HTP) which then undergo decarboxylation by the enzyme amino acid decarboxylase to produce dopamine and serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine) respectively. This amine uptake and decarboxylation provides an important target for functional imaging with PET. In comparative studies of patients with a variety of NETs, 11C-5HTP PET proved better than CT and SRS by visualizing additional small lesions. 11C-5HTP is selectively taken up by neuroendocrine tumour cells, decarboxylated and irreversibly trapped as 11C serotonin. With carbidopa premedication orally before 11C-5HTP PET examination, the tumour uptake can be increased and the urinary radioactivity concentration considerably reduced (30). Whole-body 11C-5HTP PET may therefore be useful as a universal imaging technique for gastroenteropancreatic NETs, imaging more tumour lesions than 111In-octreotide and CT in the majority of patients (31).

Gallium-68 (68Ga) is a positron emitter with a suitable half life of 68 minutes and has been utilized for the labelling of somatostatin analogues for PET imaging of NETs with promising results in a small number of patients. The synthetic somatostatin analogues such as tetraazacyclododecane-tetraacetic acid-d-Phe(1)-Tyr(3)-octreotide (DOTA-TOC) can be readily labelled with 68Ga. 68Ga-labelled peptides are rapidly accumulated in tumours but not within tissues that do not express SSTRs, providing high contrast imaging. They have high affinity for SSTR2, -3, -5 and intermediate affinity for SSTR4. Kidney uptake for both radiopharmaceuticals is also much lower than 111In octreotide. The pre-clinical and clinical applications of this technique have been successful in a variety of tumours, particularly NETs and its labelling with other ligands and molecules will improve the management of other tumours and the assessment of infection (32). Gabriel et al. (33) compared 68Ga-DOTA-TOC PET using conventional scintigraphy with 99mTc-HYNIC-TOC and 111In-DOTA-TOC. 68Ga-DOTA-TOC PET showed a significantly higher detection rate compared with conventional SSTR scintigraphy and diagnostic CT with clinical impact in a considerable number of patients. The introduction of radiopharmaceuticals for PET imaging has therefore improved the quality of imaging of NETs.

  • Received May 3, 2010.
  • Revision received July 20, 2010.
  • Accepted August 24, 2010.
  • Copyright © 2010 The Author(s). Published by the International Institute of Anticancer Research.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Ferolla P,
    2. Faggiano A,
    3. Mansueto G,
    4. et al.
    : The biological characterization of neuroendocrine tumors: the role of neuroendocrine markers; J Endocrinol Invest 31(3): 277-286, 2008
    OpenUrlPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Grand CS
    : Gastrointestinal endocrine tumours. Insulinoma. Baillieres Clin Gastroenterol 10: 645-671, 1996.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Zollinger RM,
    2. Ellison EH
    : Primary peptic ulcerations of the jejunum associated with islet cell tumours of the pancreas. Ann Surg 142: 709-728, 1955.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Solcia E,
    2. Kloppel G,
    3. Sobin LH
    : Histological Typing of Endocrine Tumours. WHO International Classification of Tumours. Berlin: Springer pp. 1-149, 1999.
  5. ↵
    1. Capella C,
    2. Heitz PU,
    3. Höfler H,
    4. et al.
    : Revised classification of neuroendocrine tumours of the lung, pancreas and gut. Digestion 55(suppl 3): 11-23, 1994.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Öberg K,
    2. Stridsberg M
    : Chromogranins as diagnostic and prognostic markers in neuroendocrine tumours. Adv Exp Med Biol 482: 329-337, 2000.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Johnson DH,
    2. Marangos PJ,
    3. Forbes JT,
    4. et al.
    : Potential utility of serum neuron-specific enolase levels in small cell carcinoma of the lung. Cancer Res 44(11): 5409-5414, 1984.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Anastasiades KD,
    2. Mullins RE,
    3. Conn RB
    : Neuron-specific enolase: assessment by ELISA in patients with small cell carcinoma of the lung. Am J Clin Pathol 87(2): 245-249, 1987.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Akoun GM,
    2. Scarna HM,
    3. Milleron BJ,
    4. et al.
    : Serum neuron-specific enolase. A marker for disease extent and response to therapy for small cell lung cancer. Chest 87(1): 39-43, 1985.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Thompson RJ,
    2. Doran JF,
    3. Jackson P,
    4. et al.
    : PGP 9.5 – a new marker for vertebrate neurons and neuroendocrine cells. Brain Res 14:278(1-2): 224-228, 1983.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Hall PA,
    2. Levison DA
    : Assessment of cell proliferation in histologic material. J Clin Pathol 43(3): 184-192, 1990.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    1. Reubi JC
    : Clinical relevance of somatostin receptor imaging. Eur J Nucl Med 131: 575-576, 1994.
    OpenUrl
  12. ↵
    1. D'Onofrio M,
    2. Mansueto G,
    3. Falconi M,
    4. et al.
    : Neuroendocrine pancreatic tumor: value of contrast enhanced ultrasonography. Abdom Imaging 29: 246-258, 2004.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Khan S,
    2. Lloyd C,
    3. Syszko T,
    4. et al.
    : PET imaging in endocrine tumours. Minerva Edocrinologica 33(2): 41-52, 2008.
    OpenUrl
  14. ↵
    1. Grenacher L,
    2. Klauss M
    : Computed tomography of pancreatic tumors. Radiologe 49(2): 107-123, 2009.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Reznek R
    : CT/MRI of neuroendocrine tumours. Cancer Imaging; 6: 163-177, 2006.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Schillaci O,
    2. Scopinaro F,
    3. Angeletti S,
    4. et al.
    : SPECT improves accuracy of somatostatin receptors scintigraphy in abdominal carcinoids tumours. J Nucl Med 37: 1452-1456, 1996.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    1. Wagner C,
    2. Kaplan SR,
    3. Tannenbaum GS
    : Interactions of ghrelin signaling pathways with the GH neuroendocrine axis: a new and experimentally tested model. J Mol Endocrinol 43(3): 105-119, 2009.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. ↵
    1. Reubi JC,
    2. Laissue J,
    3. Krenning E,
    4. et al.
    : Somatostatin receptors in human cancer: incidence, characteristic, functional correlates and clinical implications. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 43: 27-35, 1992.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Reubi JC,
    2. Kvols L,
    3. Krennig E,
    4. et al.
    : Distribution of somatostatin receptors in normal and tumours tissue. Metabolism 39: 78-81, 1990.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Charapko BE,
    2. Nocun A,
    3. Golebiewska R,
    4. et al.
    : 99mTc-EDDA/HYNIC-TOC somatostatin receptor scintigraphy in daily clinical practice. Med Sci .Monit 16(4): MT 35-44, 2010
    OpenUrl
    1. Hanson MW
    : Scintigraphic evaluation of neuroendocrine tumours. Applied Radiology 30: 11-17, 2001.
    OpenUrl
  21. ↵
    1. Von Guggenberg,
    2. Sarg E,
    3. Lindtner H,
    4. et al.
    : Preparation via co-ligand exchange and characterization of 99mTc-EDDA-HYNIC-D-Phe1, Tyr3-octreotide (99mTc-EDDA/HYNIC-TOC). J Label Compd Radiopharm 46: 307-318, 2003.
    OpenUrl
  22. ↵
    1. Kolenc P,
    2. Fettich J,
    3. Slodnjak I,
    4. et al.
    : Comparison of 99mTc-EDDA/HYNIC-TOC and 111In-DTPA-octreotide uptake in patients without known pathology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 31(suppl 2): 358 (abs), 2004.
    OpenUrl
  23. ↵
    1. Neels OC,
    2. Koopmans KP,
    3. Jager PL,
    4. et al.
    : Manipulation of (11C)-5-hydroxytryptophan and 6(18F)fluoro3,4-diihydroxy-L-phenylalanine accumulation in neuroendocrine tumors cells. Cancer Res 68(17): 7183-7190, 2008.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. ↵
    1. Marzola MC,
    2. Pelizzo MR,
    3. Ferdeghini M,
    4. et al.
    : Dual PET/CT with 18F-DOPA and 18F-FDG in metastatic medullary thyroid carcinoma and rapidly increasing calcitonin levels: comparison with conventional imaging. Eur J Surg Oncol 36(4): 414-421, 2010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. ↵
    1. Virgolini I,
    2. Ambrosini V,
    3. Bomanji JB,
    4. et al.
    : Procedure guidelines for PET/CT tumor imaging with 68Ga-DOTA-coniugated peptides: 68Ga-DOTA-TOC, 68Ga-DOTA-NOC, 68Ga-DOTA-TATE. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 37(10): 2004-2010, 2010.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. Hoegerle S,
    2. Altehoefer C,
    3. Ghanem N,
    4. et al.
    : Whole-body 18F-DOPA PET for detection of gastrointestinal carcinoid tumours. Radiology 220: 373-380, 2001.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. ↵
    1. Ambrosini V,
    2. Tomassetti P,
    3. Rubello D,
    4. et al.
    : Role of 18F-DOPA PET/CT imaging in the management of patients with 111In-pentetreotide negative GEP tumours. Nucl Med Commun 28: 473-477, 2007.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    1. Orlefors H,
    2. Sundin A,
    3. Lu L,
    4. et al.
    : Carbidopa pretreatment improves image interpretation and visualisation of carcinoid tumours with 11C-5-hydroxytryptophan positron-emission tomography. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 33: 60-65, 2006.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. ↵
    1. Khan S,
    2. Lloyd C,
    3. Syszko T,
    4. et al.
    : PET imaging in endocrine tumours. Minerva Edocrinologica 33(2): 41-52, 2008.
    OpenUrl
  30. ↵
    1. Al-Nahhas A,
    2. Win Z,
    3. Szyszko T,
    4. et al.
    : Gallium-68 PET: a new frontier in receptor cancer imaging. Anticancer Res 27: 4087-4094, 2007.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  31. ↵
    1. Gabriel M,
    2. Decristoforo C,
    3. Kendler D,
    4. et al.
    : 68Ga-DOTA-Tyr3-octreotide PET in neuroendocrine tumours: comparison with somatostatin receptor scintigraphy and CT. J Nucl Med 48: 508-518, 2007.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

In Vivo
Vol. 24, Issue 5
September-October 2010
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on In Vivo.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Diagnostics of Neuroendocrine Tumours
(Your Name) has sent you a message from In Vivo
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the In Vivo web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
12 + 7 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Diagnostics of Neuroendocrine Tumours
M. HODOLIČ, J. FETTICH, E. BANTI, S. CHONDROGIANNIS, A. AL-NAHHAS, D. RUBELLO
In Vivo Sep 2010, 24 (5) 771-774;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Reprints and Permissions
Share
Diagnostics of Neuroendocrine Tumours
M. HODOLIČ, J. FETTICH, E. BANTI, S. CHONDROGIANNIS, A. AL-NAHHAS, D. RUBELLO
In Vivo Sep 2010, 24 (5) 771-774;
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Laboratory Studies and Histopathology
    • Morphologic Imaging Techniques
    • Functional Imaging Techniques
    • PET and PET Radiotracers in Diagnosis of NETs
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Effects of Short-term High-dose Vitamin D Supplementation on Mineral Homeostasis in Healthy Young Adults
  • Impact of Heart Dose on Survival in Palliative Radiotherapy for Bone Metastases: Propensity Score-matched Analysis
  • Usability of a Reminder App that May Help to Reduce Radiotherapy-related Skin Toxicity in Patients With Breast Cancer
Show more Clinical Studies
In Vivo

© 2026 In Vivo

Powered by HighWire