2004Nuclear Medicine CommunicationsRequires access

Difference in mIBG uptake in foregut, midgut and hindgut carcinoid tumours

G. Gopinath, J. R. Buscombe, D. Ratnamm, Martyn Caplin, A J Hilson

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Carcinoid tumours are generally classified according to their origin as foregut, midgut or hindgut. 111In pentetreotide and 123I labelled mIBG are commonly used for diagnosis of these tumours. The aim of our study was to assess the difference in mIBG uptake in foregut, midgut and hindgut carcinoids. Fifty-two patients with carcinoid tumours (13 foregut, 30 midgut, 4 hindgut, and 5 unknown) underwent 123I labelled mIBG whole-body and liver SPECT imaging. The tumour uptakes were classified on visual analysis as grade 1 (tumour uptake less than liver), grade 2 (uptake equal to liver) and grade 3 (uptake greater than liver). Eighteen (34%) patients had grade 1 uptake (3 foregut, 14 mid and hindgut, 1 unknown), 18 (34%) had grade 2 uptake (7 foregut, 7 mid and hindgut, 4 unknown) and 16 (32%) had grade 3 uptake (3 foregut, 13 mid and hindgut). Grade 3 uptake was seen in more patients with mid and hindgut carcinoids (38%) than foregut (23%). 123I labelled mIBG demonstrated high uptake (grade 3) in mid and hindgut compared to foregut carcinoids and is more useful. The low to moderate uptake in foregut carcinoids could be due to the known cytochemical differences in these tumours.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Carcinoid tumours are generally classified according to their origin as foregut, midgut or hindgut. 111In pentetreotide and 123I labelled mIBG are commonly used for diagnosis of these tumours. The aim of our study was to assess the difference in mIBG uptake in foregut, midgut and hindgut carcinoids. Fifty-two patients with carcinoid tumours (13 foregut, 30 midgut, 4 hindgut, and 5 unknown) underwent 123I labelled mIBG whole-body and liver SPECT imaging. The tumour uptakes were classified on visual analysis as grade 1 (tumour uptake less than liver), grade 2 (uptake equal to liver) and grade 3 (uptake greater than liver). Eighteen (34%) patients had grade 1 uptake (3 foregut, 14 mid and hindgut, 1 unknown), 18 (34%) had grade 2 uptake (7 foregut, 7 mid and hindgut, 4 unknown) and 16 (32%) had grade 3 uptake (3 foregut, 13 mid and hindgut). Grade 3 uptake was seen in more patients with mid and hindgut carcinoids (38%) than foregut (23%). 123I labelled mIBG demonstrated high uptake (grade 3) in mid and hindgut compared to foregut carcinoids and is more useful. The low to moderate uptake in foregut carcinoids could be due to the known cytochemical differences in these tumours.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Carcinoid tumours are generally classified according to their origin as foregut, midgut or hindgut. 111In pentetreotide and 123I labelled mIBG are commonly used for diagnosis of these tumours. The aim of our study was to assess the difference in mIBG uptake in foregut, midgut and hindgut carcinoids. Fifty-two patients with carcinoid tumours (13 foregut, 30 midgut, 4 hindgut, and 5 unknown) underwent 123I labelled mIBG whole-body and liver SPECT imaging. The tumour uptakes were classified on visual analysis as grade 1 (tumour uptake less than liver), grade 2 (uptake equal to liver) and grade 3 (uptake greater than liver). Eighteen (34%) patients had grade 1 uptake (3 foregut, 14 mid and hindgut, 1 unknown), 18 (34%) had grade 2 uptake (7 foregut, 7 mid and hindgut, 4 unknown) and 16 (32%) had grade 3 uptake (3 foregut, 13 mid and hindgut). Grade 3 uptake was seen in more patients with mid and hindgut carcinoids (38%) than foregut (23%). 123I labelled mIBG demonstrated high uptake (grade 3) in mid and hindgut compared to foregut carcinoids and is more useful. The low to moderate uptake in foregut carcinoids could be due to the known cytochemical differences in these tumours.

Key concepts: Foregut, Hindgut, Midgut, Biology, Carcinoid tumour, Pathology, Anatomy, Internal medicine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Difference in mIBG uptake in foregut, midgut and hindgut carcinoid tumours — Research Paper | ScholarLens