الفهرس 
Review of LiteratureOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 128 |  |  |
| | | from | 128 | | |
Abstract
Currently, 18FDG PET-CT plays a great role in oncological diagnosis, staging and management. Over the past several years, it has gained attraction as the imaging technique of choice in lymphoma. This is attributed to its high sensitivity for tumor detection and add important functional information as it is not only reliable on nodal size to determine the presence or absence of malignancy. But, it allows the investigator to visualize and measure the intensity of residual metabolic activity within this node.
Also, it has a major role in evaluation of the individual chemosensitivity and subsequently to adapt further therapy. Response assessment of lymphoma has mostly been achieved using visual criteria, like Deauville five-point scale.
Nowadays, the use of functional quantitative parameters MTV and TLG rather than the universal metabolic quantitative parameter SUV as both may provide additional valuable information for prediction of tumor reaction to treatment.
On studying the predictive value of both MTV and TLG of target lesions instead of WBMTV and WBTLG (which are time consuming and need advanced software) by using the new Response Evaluation Criteria in Lymphoma 2017 in HL, We have found that the initial SUVmax and TLG showed a good predictive value to distinguish between the patients with CR from those with nCR.
Moreover, despite the availability of multiple studies searching the correlation between TLG and MTV with LDH in various types of malignancies and different types of lymphoma; yet, there were few available studies concerning HL. We investigated the association of TLG and MTV with serologic tumor marker LDH in HL patients. We have found a significant correlation between the initial LDH and initial SUVmax, MTV and TLG.
Also, The tumor markers and B-symptoms’ predictive value were also investigated in the literature and on the contrary, to the predictive value of initial PET CT parameters, we have found that the initial laboratory results of LDH and ESR had no obvious role in prediction of tumor response.
On the other hand, we have demonstrated that B-symptoms have a good predictive value as the patients presented with negative B-symptoms have developed CR after start of treatment than those with positive B- symptoms.