68Ga-pentixafor PET/CT shows better diagnostic performance than 18F-FDG PET/CT in chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma: a case report and review of literature
Rattachement africain : cn. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) is an indolent B-cell lymphoma for which current imaging modalities offer limited diagnostic value. This article reports a comparison of the imaging features of 18 F-FDG and 68 Ga-pentixafor in this disease and reviews the relevant literature. A 60-year-old woman presented with a 6-month history of fever and scattered systemic lymphadenopathy. The patient underwent both 18 F-FDG and 68 Ga-pentixafor PET/CT imaging within a 2-day period. 68 Ga-pentixafor PET/CT identified significantly increased metabolic activity in enlarged lymph nodes, the spleen, and bone marrow. Immunohistochemical staining demonstrated a phenotypic profile positive for CD5, CD20, and CD23; showed focal positivity for cyclin D1; and was negative for CD10, BCL-6, and SOX11, findings consistent with the diagnosis of CLL/SLL. Compared with 18 F-FDG, 68 Ga-pentixafor PET/CT detected more lesions with significantly higher tracer uptake. This case suggests that, for patients with CLL/SLL, 68 Ga-pentixafor PET/CT demonstrates significantly superior performance in evaluating the tumor burden and delineating the disease extent compared with 18 F-FDG PET/CT.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- 68Ga-pentixafor PET/CT shows better diagnostic performance than 18F-FDG PET/CT in chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma: a case report and review of literature
- Date Crossref
- 02/04/2026
- Éditeur
- Frontiers Media SA
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.