Download PDF
Nuklearmedizin
DOI: 10.1055/a-2383-2584
Case Report

A metastatic melanoma with an atypical low 18F-FDG uptake

Laura Ternoy
1   Dermatology, CHU de Rennes, Rennes, France (Ringgold ID: RIN36684)
,
Pierre Meneret
2   Nuclear Medicine, Centre Eugene Marquis, Rennes, France (Ringgold ID: RIN56479)
,
Xavier Palard-Novello
3   Bretagne, Centre Eugene Marquis, Rennes, France (Ringgold ID: RIN56479)
,
David Russo
1   Dermatology, CHU de Rennes, Rennes, France (Ringgold ID: RIN36684)
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Introduction

18F-FDG PET/CT is a valuable tool for staging and treatment monitoring of melanoma, as melanoma cells usually present with a high avidity for 18F-FDG [1] [2]. However, there are some common and specific pitfalls that can lead to false-positives and false-negatives [3]. False-positives are often due to infections or inflammatory diseases [4]. When monitoring response to immune checkpoint inhibitors, particular attention must be paid to pseudoprogression or to immune related effects. False-negatives may occur for reasons related to patient preparation such as incomplete fasting, hyperglycaemia or hyperinsulinaemia [5]. Antitumoral medication, if started before the baseline scan, or anti-inflammatory drugs such as glucosteroid (which can also cause hyperglycaemia) may also reduce 18F-FDG uptake. Necrotic lesions may show reduced or no uptake, and small lesions (e.g., in-transit metastases) are prone to partial volume effect. BRAF mutation status is an important parameter in the management of melanoma but does not appear to correlate with 18F-FDG uptake.



Publication History

Received: 05 August 2024

Accepted: 06 August 2024

Article published online:
04 December 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Reinhardt MJ, Joe AY, Jaeger U. et al. Diagnostic performance of whole body dual modality 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging for N- and M-staging of malignant melanoma: experience with 250 consecutive patients. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol 2006; 24 (07) 1178-1187
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Lee JW, Nam SB, Kim SJ. Role of 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography or Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography for the Detection of Recurrent Disease after Treatment of Malignant Melanoma. Oncology 2019; 97 (05) 286‑293
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Aide N, Iravani A, Prigent K. et al. PET/CT variants and pitfalls in malignant melanoma. Cancer Imaging 2022; 22: 3
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Pijl JP, Nienhuis PH, Kwee TC. et al. Limitations and Pitfalls of FDG-PET/CT in Infection and Inflammation. Semin Nucl Med 2021; 51 (06) 633‑645
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Boellaard R, Delgado-Bolton R, Oyen WJG. et al. FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015; 42 (02) 328‑354
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar