Brain scintigrams in metastatic carcinoma
A review of clinical experience with two agents used in brain tumor imaging, 203Hg‐chlormerodrin and 99mTc‐pertechnetate, was made to determine true‐positive and false‐positive rates for the localization of metastatic brain tumors. We found no significant difference between the two agents in the tru...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Cancer 1972-10, Vol.30 (4), p.953-956 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 956 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 953 |
| container_title | Cancer |
| container_volume | 30 |
| creator | Haynie, Thomas P. Jhingran, Satish G. Leavens, Milam E. Konikowski, T. Jahns, Monroe F. |
| description | A review of clinical experience with two agents used in brain tumor imaging, 203Hg‐chlormerodrin and 99mTc‐pertechnetate, was made to determine true‐positive and false‐positive rates for the localization of metastatic brain tumors. We found no significant difference between the two agents in the true‐positive rate, 70% and 65%, respectively. False‐positive rate also revealed no significant differences, 12% and 5%, respectively. Experience with delayed scans using 99mTc‐pertechnetate suggests that true‐positive rates may be increased with a longer interval between injection and scan than was employed in most of these patients. Newer radiopharmaceuticals currently under investigation may also offer improved tumor detection. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1002/1097-0142(197210)30:4<953::AID-CNCR2820300415>3.0.CO;2-I |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_81619696</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>81619696</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3795-f5dcf3237e8e1f99f7569efd6000aa9bd6acb9545253bbce9d4ec99e6d84c3523</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqVkFtLw0AQhRdRaq3-BKFPYh9SZ29JtopY4y1QLIhC34bNZiORpq3ZFOm_d0tLQR8En4bhzJxz-Ai5odCnAOyCgooCoIKdUxUxCj0OA3GlJB8MhuldkDwnLyxmwAEElde8D_1kfMmCdI-0d6_7pA0AcSAFnxySI-c-_BoxyVukJSFSgsdt0rutdTnrOlPOmvK91pXr-rWyjXaNbkrTNbr22rzSx-Sg0FNnT7azQ94e7l-Tp2A0fkyT4SgwPFIyKGRuCs54ZGNLC6WKSIbKFnnow7VWWR5qkykppC-SZcaqXFijlA3zWBguGe-Qs43vop5_Lq1rsCqdsdOpntn50mFMQ6pCFfrDyebQ1HPnalvgoi4rXa-QAq4p4hoFrlHghiJyQIGeIqKniD8pIkfAZIwMU299uu2wzCqb74y32LxuNvpXObWrf-T-GftL4d_MQI3a</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>81619696</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Brain scintigrams in metastatic carcinoma</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Haynie, Thomas P. ; Jhingran, Satish G. ; Leavens, Milam E. ; Konikowski, T. ; Jahns, Monroe F.</creator><creatorcontrib>Haynie, Thomas P. ; Jhingran, Satish G. ; Leavens, Milam E. ; Konikowski, T. ; Jahns, Monroe F.</creatorcontrib><description>A review of clinical experience with two agents used in brain tumor imaging, 203Hg‐chlormerodrin and 99mTc‐pertechnetate, was made to determine true‐positive and false‐positive rates for the localization of metastatic brain tumors. We found no significant difference between the two agents in the true‐positive rate, 70% and 65%, respectively. False‐positive rate also revealed no significant differences, 12% and 5%, respectively. Experience with delayed scans using 99mTc‐pertechnetate suggests that true‐positive rates may be increased with a longer interval between injection and scan than was employed in most of these patients. Newer radiopharmaceuticals currently under investigation may also offer improved tumor detection.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0008-543X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-0142</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(197210)30:4<953::AID-CNCR2820300415>3.0.CO;2-I</identifier><identifier>PMID: 5079438</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><subject>Brain Neoplasms - diagnosis ; Cerebellar Neoplasms - diagnosis ; Cerebrovascular Disorders - diagnosis ; Chlormerodrin ; False Positive Reactions ; Humans ; Mercury Isotopes ; Methods ; Neoplasm Metastasis ; Pituitary Neoplasms - diagnosis ; Radionuclide Imaging ; Skull Neoplasms - diagnosis ; Technetium ; Time Factors</subject><ispartof>Cancer, 1972-10, Vol.30 (4), p.953-956</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 1972 American Cancer Society</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3795-f5dcf3237e8e1f99f7569efd6000aa9bd6acb9545253bbce9d4ec99e6d84c3523</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/5079438$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Haynie, Thomas P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jhingran, Satish G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leavens, Milam E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Konikowski, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jahns, Monroe F.</creatorcontrib><title>Brain scintigrams in metastatic carcinoma</title><title>Cancer</title><addtitle>Cancer</addtitle><description>A review of clinical experience with two agents used in brain tumor imaging, 203Hg‐chlormerodrin and 99mTc‐pertechnetate, was made to determine true‐positive and false‐positive rates for the localization of metastatic brain tumors. We found no significant difference between the two agents in the true‐positive rate, 70% and 65%, respectively. False‐positive rate also revealed no significant differences, 12% and 5%, respectively. Experience with delayed scans using 99mTc‐pertechnetate suggests that true‐positive rates may be increased with a longer interval between injection and scan than was employed in most of these patients. Newer radiopharmaceuticals currently under investigation may also offer improved tumor detection.</description><subject>Brain Neoplasms - diagnosis</subject><subject>Cerebellar Neoplasms - diagnosis</subject><subject>Cerebrovascular Disorders - diagnosis</subject><subject>Chlormerodrin</subject><subject>False Positive Reactions</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Mercury Isotopes</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Neoplasm Metastasis</subject><subject>Pituitary Neoplasms - diagnosis</subject><subject>Radionuclide Imaging</subject><subject>Skull Neoplasms - diagnosis</subject><subject>Technetium</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><issn>0008-543X</issn><issn>1097-0142</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1972</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqVkFtLw0AQhRdRaq3-BKFPYh9SZ29JtopY4y1QLIhC34bNZiORpq3ZFOm_d0tLQR8En4bhzJxz-Ai5odCnAOyCgooCoIKdUxUxCj0OA3GlJB8MhuldkDwnLyxmwAEElde8D_1kfMmCdI-0d6_7pA0AcSAFnxySI-c-_BoxyVukJSFSgsdt0rutdTnrOlPOmvK91pXr-rWyjXaNbkrTNbr22rzSx-Sg0FNnT7azQ94e7l-Tp2A0fkyT4SgwPFIyKGRuCs54ZGNLC6WKSIbKFnnow7VWWR5qkykppC-SZcaqXFijlA3zWBguGe-Qs43vop5_Lq1rsCqdsdOpntn50mFMQ6pCFfrDyebQ1HPnalvgoi4rXa-QAq4p4hoFrlHghiJyQIGeIqKniD8pIkfAZIwMU299uu2wzCqb74y32LxuNvpXObWrf-T-GftL4d_MQI3a</recordid><startdate>197210</startdate><enddate>197210</enddate><creator>Haynie, Thomas P.</creator><creator>Jhingran, Satish G.</creator><creator>Leavens, Milam E.</creator><creator>Konikowski, T.</creator><creator>Jahns, Monroe F.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>197210</creationdate><title>Brain scintigrams in metastatic carcinoma</title><author>Haynie, Thomas P. ; Jhingran, Satish G. ; Leavens, Milam E. ; Konikowski, T. ; Jahns, Monroe F.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3795-f5dcf3237e8e1f99f7569efd6000aa9bd6acb9545253bbce9d4ec99e6d84c3523</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1972</creationdate><topic>Brain Neoplasms - diagnosis</topic><topic>Cerebellar Neoplasms - diagnosis</topic><topic>Cerebrovascular Disorders - diagnosis</topic><topic>Chlormerodrin</topic><topic>False Positive Reactions</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Mercury Isotopes</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Neoplasm Metastasis</topic><topic>Pituitary Neoplasms - diagnosis</topic><topic>Radionuclide Imaging</topic><topic>Skull Neoplasms - diagnosis</topic><topic>Technetium</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Haynie, Thomas P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jhingran, Satish G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leavens, Milam E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Konikowski, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jahns, Monroe F.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Cancer</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Haynie, Thomas P.</au><au>Jhingran, Satish G.</au><au>Leavens, Milam E.</au><au>Konikowski, T.</au><au>Jahns, Monroe F.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Brain scintigrams in metastatic carcinoma</atitle><jtitle>Cancer</jtitle><addtitle>Cancer</addtitle><date>1972-10</date><risdate>1972</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>953</spage><epage>956</epage><pages>953-956</pages><issn>0008-543X</issn><eissn>1097-0142</eissn><abstract>A review of clinical experience with two agents used in brain tumor imaging, 203Hg‐chlormerodrin and 99mTc‐pertechnetate, was made to determine true‐positive and false‐positive rates for the localization of metastatic brain tumors. We found no significant difference between the two agents in the true‐positive rate, 70% and 65%, respectively. False‐positive rate also revealed no significant differences, 12% and 5%, respectively. Experience with delayed scans using 99mTc‐pertechnetate suggests that true‐positive rates may be increased with a longer interval between injection and scan than was employed in most of these patients. Newer radiopharmaceuticals currently under investigation may also offer improved tumor detection.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</pub><pmid>5079438</pmid><doi>10.1002/1097-0142(197210)30:4<953::AID-CNCR2820300415>3.0.CO;2-I</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0008-543X |
| ispartof | Cancer, 1972-10, Vol.30 (4), p.953-956 |
| issn | 0008-543X 1097-0142 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_81619696 |
| source | MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Brain Neoplasms - diagnosis Cerebellar Neoplasms - diagnosis Cerebrovascular Disorders - diagnosis Chlormerodrin False Positive Reactions Humans Mercury Isotopes Methods Neoplasm Metastasis Pituitary Neoplasms - diagnosis Radionuclide Imaging Skull Neoplasms - diagnosis Technetium Time Factors |
| title | Brain scintigrams in metastatic carcinoma |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T17%3A08%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Brain%20scintigrams%20in%20metastatic%20carcinoma&rft.jtitle=Cancer&rft.au=Haynie,%20Thomas%20P.&rft.date=1972-10&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=953&rft.epage=956&rft.pages=953-956&rft.issn=0008-543X&rft.eissn=1097-0142&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/1097-0142(197210)30:4%3C953::AID-CNCR2820300415%3E3.0.CO;2-I&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E81619696%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=81619696&rft_id=info:pmid/5079438&rfr_iscdi=true |