Table of Contents
ISRN Hematology
Volume 2012, Article ID 456706, 9 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.5402/2012/456706
Review Article

18-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in the Management of Aggressive Non-Hodgkin's B-Cell Lymphoma

1Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114, USA
2Division of Abdominal Imaging & Interventional Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA

Received 8 December 2011; Accepted 29 December 2011

Academic Editors: S. Daenen, M. Gobbi, and S. Koschmieder

Copyright © 2012 M. J. Shelly et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. C. R. Flowers and J. O. Armitage, “A decade of progress in lymphoma: advances and continuing challenges,” Clinical Lymphoma, Myeloma and Leukemia, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 414–423, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  2. A. Jemal, R. Siegel, J. Xu, and E. Ward, “Cancer statistics, 2010,” CA Cancer Journal for Clinicians, vol. 60, no. 5, pp. 277–300, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  3. E. Campo, S. H. Swerdlow, N. L. Harris, S. Pileri, H. Stein, and E. S. Jaffe, “The 2008 WHO classification of lymphoid neoplasms and beyond: evolving concepts and practical applications,” Blood, vol. 117, no. 19, pp. 5019–5032, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  4. E. S. Jaffe, “The 2008 WHO classification of lymphomas: implications for clinical practice and translational research,” Hematology, pp. 523–531, 2009. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. C. G. Cronin, R. Swords, M. T. Truong et al., “Clinical utility of PET/CT in lymphoma,” American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 194, no. 1, pp. W91–W103, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  6. B. D. Cheson, B. Pfistner, M. E. Juweid et al., “Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 579–586, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  7. M. E. Juweid, S. Stroobants, O. S. Hoekstra et al., “Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the imaging subcommittee of international harmonization project in lymphoma,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 571–578, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  8. M. Okada, N. Sato, K. Ishii, K. Matsumura, M. Hosono, and T. Murakami, “FDG PET/CT versus CT, MR imaging, and 67Ga scintigraphy in the posttherapy evaluation of Malignant lymphoma,” Radiographics, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 939–957, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  9. M. Hoffmann, K. Kletter, A. Becherer, U. Jäger, A. Chott, and M. Raderer, “18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG-PET) for staging and follow-up of marginal zone B-cell lymphoma,” Oncology, vol. 64, no. 4, pp. 336–340, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  10. S. C. Chua, F. I. Rozalli, and S. R. O'Connor, “Imaging features of primary extranodal lymphomas,” Clinical Radiology, vol. 64, no. 6, pp. 574–588, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  11. W. K. Lee, E. W. F. Lau, V. A. Duddalwar, A. J. Stanley, and Y. Y. Ho, “Abdominal manifestations of extranodal lymphoma: spectrum of imaging findings,” American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 191, no. 1, pp. 198–206, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  12. P. Seam, M. E. Juweid, and B. D. Cheson, “The role of FDG-PET scans in patients with lymphoma,” Blood, vol. 110, no. 10, pp. 3507–3516, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  13. F. M. Paes, D. G. Kalkanis, P. A. Sideras, and A. N. Serafini, “FDG PET/CT of extranodal involvement in non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin disease,” Radiographics, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 269–291, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  14. G. K. von Schulthess, H. C. Steinert, and T. F. Hany, “Integrated PET/CT: current applications and future directions,” Radiology, vol. 238, no. 2, pp. 405–422, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  15. S. C. Huang, “Anatomy of SUV. Standardized uptake value,” Nuclear Medicine and Biology, vol. 27, pp. 643–646, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  16. M. Allen-Auerbach, S. de Vos, and J. Czernin, “The impact of fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography in primary staging and patient management in lymphoma patients,” Radiologic Clinics of North America, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 199–211, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  17. P. R. Mueller, J. T. Ferrucci Jr., and W. P. Harbin, “Appearance of lymphomatous involvement of the mesentery by ultrasonography and body computed tomography: the “sandwich sign”,” Radiology, vol. 134, no. 2, pp. 467–473, 1980. View at Google Scholar
  18. M. Tatsumi, C. Cohade, Y. Nakamoto, E. K. Fishman, and R. L. Wahl, “Direct comparison of FDG PET and CT findings in patients with lymphoma: initial experience,” Radiology, vol. 237, no. 3, pp. 1038–1045, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  19. L. S. Freudenberg, G. Antoch, P. Schütt et al., “FDG-PET/CT in re-staging of patients with lymphoma,” European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 325–329, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  20. L. Le Dortz, S. De Guibert, S. Bayat et al., “Diagnostic and prognostic impact of 18F-FDG PET/CT in follicular lymphoma,” European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, vol. 37, no. 12, pp. 2307–2314, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  21. B. D. Cheson, S. J. Horning, B. Coiffier et al., “Report of an international workshop to standardize response criteria for non-Hodgkin's lymphomas,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 1244–1253, 1999. View at Google Scholar
  22. W. D. Kaplan, M. S. Jochelson, T. S. Herman et al., “Gallium-67 imaging: a predictor of residual tumor viability and clinical outcome in patients with diffuse large-cell lymphoma,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 8, no. 12, pp. 1966–1970, 1990. View at Google Scholar
  23. D. Front, R. Bar-Shalom, M. Mor et al., “Aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma: early prediction of outcome with 67Ga scintigraphy,” Radiology, vol. 214, no. 1, pp. 253–257, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. D. Front, R. Bar-Shalom, and O. Israel, “The continuing clinical role of gallium 67 scintigraphy in the age of receptor imaging,” Seminars in Nuclear Medicine, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 68–74, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. B. D. Cheson, “Role of functional imaging in the management of lymphoma,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 29, no. 14, pp. 1844–1854, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  26. E. Even-Sapir and O. Israel, “Gallium-67 scintigraphy: a cornerstone in functional imaging of lymphoma,” European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. S65–S81, 2003. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. A. Wirth, J. F. Seymour, R. J. Hicks et al., “Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography, gallium-67 scintigraphy, and conventional staging for Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma,” American Journal of Medicine, vol. 112, no. 4, pp. 262–268, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. N. Tsukamoto, M. Kojima, M. Hasegawa et al., “The usefulness of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG-PET) and a comparison of 18F-FDG-PET with 67gallium scintigraphy in the evaluation of lymphoma: relation to histologic subtypes based on the World Health Organization classification,” Cancer, vol. 110, no. 3, pp. 652–659, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  29. L. Kostakoglu, J. P. Leonard, I. Kuji, M. Coleman, S. Vallabhajosula, and S. J. Goldsmith, “Comparison of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and Ga-67 scintigraphy in evaluation of lymphoma,” Cancer, vol. 94, no. 4, pp. 879–888, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  30. M. Hutchings and L. Specht, “PET/CT in the management of haematological malignancies,” European Journal of Haematology, vol. 80, no. 5, pp. 369–380, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  31. P. Raanani, Y. Shasha, C. Perry et al., “Is CT scan still necessary for staging in Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients in the PET/CT era?” Annals of Oncology, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 117–122, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  32. E. Miller, U. Metser, G. Avrahami et al., “Role of 18F-FDG PET/CT in staging and follow-up of lymphoma in pediatric and young adult patients,” Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 689–694, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. F. Moog, M. Bangerter, C. G. Diederichs et al., “Lymphoma: role of whole-body 2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose (FDG) PET in nodal staging,” Radiology, vol. 203, no. 3, pp. 795–800, 1997. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. F. Moog, M. Bangerter, C. G. Diederichs et al., “Extranodal malignant lymphoma: detection with FDG PET versus CT,” Radiology, vol. 206, no. 2, pp. 475–481, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. G. Jerusalem and Y. Beguin, “The place of positron emission tomography imaging in the management of patients with malignant lymphoma,” Haematologica, vol. 91, no. 4, pp. 442–444, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. G. Jerusalem, Y. Beguin, M. F. Fassotte et al., “Whole-body positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose compared to standard procedures for staging patients with Hodgkin's disease,” Haematologica, vol. 86, no. 3, pp. 266–273, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. N. G. Schaefer, T. F. Hany, C. Taverna et al., “Non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin disease: coregistered FDG PET and CT at staging and restaging—do we need contrast-enhanced CT?” Radiology, vol. 232, no. 3, pp. 823–829, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  38. R. Naumann, B. Beuthien-Baumann, A. Reiß et al., “Substantial impact of FDG PET imaging on the therapy decision in patients with early-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma,” British Journal of Cancer, vol. 90, no. 3, pp. 620–625, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  39. M. A. Pizzichetta, G. Argenziano, R. Talamini et al., “2-(fluorine-18)fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography in the detection and staging of malignant lymphoma: a bicenter trial,” Cancer, vol. 91, no. 5, pp. 889–899, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  40. H. Schöder, J. Meta, C. Yap et al., “Effect of whole-body 18F-FDG PET imaging on clinical staging and management of patients with malignant lymphoma,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 42, no. 8, pp. 1139–1143, 2001. View at Google Scholar
  41. H. Schöder, A. Noy, M. Gönen et al., “Intensity of 18fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in positron emission tomography distinguishes between indolent and aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 23, no. 21, pp. 4643–4651, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  42. M. Hutchings, A. Loft, M. Hansen et al., “Position emission tomography with or without computed tomography in the primary staging of Hodgkin's lymphoma,” Haematologica, vol. 91, no. 4, pp. 482–489, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. F. Moog, M. Bangerter, J. Kotzerke, A. Guhlmann, N. Frickhofen, and S. N. Reske, “18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography as a new approach to detect lymphomatous bone marrow,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 603–609, 1998. View at Google Scholar
  44. E. E. Pakos, A. D. Fotopoulos, and J. P.A. Ioannidis, “18F-FDG PET for evaluation of bone marrow infiltration in staging of lymphoma: a meta-analysis,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 958–963, 2005. View at Google Scholar
  45. M. Allen-Auerbach, A. Quon, W. A. Weber et al., “Comparison between 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography and positron emission tomography/computed tomography hardware fusion for staging of patients with lymphoma,” Molecular Imaging and Biology, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 411–416, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  46. B. Rodríguez-Vigil, N. Gómez-León, I. Pinilla et al., “PET/CT in lymphoma: prospective study of enhanced full-dose PET/CT versus unenhanced low-dose PET/CT,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 47, no. 10, pp. 1643–1648, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  47. R. L. Elstrom, J. P. Leonard, M. Coleman, and R. K. J. Brown, “Combined PET and low-dose, noncontrast CT scanning obviates the need for additional diagnostic contrast-enhanced CT scans in patients undergoing staging or restaging for lymphoma,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 19, no. 10, pp. 1770–1773, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  48. G. Jerusalem, Y. Beguin, M. F. Fassotte et al., “Whole-body positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose for posttreatment evaluation in Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma has higher diagnostic and prognostic value than classical computed tomography scan imaging,” Blood, vol. 94, no. 2, pp. 429–433, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. J. M. Zijlstra, G. Lindauer-Van Der Werf, O. S. Hoekstra, L. Hooft, I. I. Riphagen, and P. C. Huijgens, “18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography for post-treatment evaluation of malignant lymphoma: a systematic review,” Haematologica, vol. 91, no. 4, pp. 522–529, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  50. N. G. Mikhaeel, A. R. Timothy, S. F. Hain, and M. J. O'Doherty, “18-FDG-PET for the assessment of residual masses on CT following treatment of lymphomas,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 11, no. 1, supplement, pp. S147–S150, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  51. N. G. Mikhaeel, A. R. Timothy, M. J. O'Doherty, S. Hain, and M. N. Maisey, “18-FDG-PET as a prognostic indicator in the treatment of aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma-comparison with CT,” Leukemia and Lymphoma, vol. 39, no. 5-6, pp. 543–553, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. P. L. Zinzani, M. Magagnoli, F. Chierichetti et al., “The role of positron emission tomography (PET) in the management of lymphoma patients,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 10, no. 10, pp. 1181–1184, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  53. M. E. Juweid, “18F-FDG PET as a routine test for posttherapy assessment of Hodgkin's disease and aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: where is the evidence?” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 9–12, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  54. C. K. Hoh, J. Glaspy, P. Rosen et al., “Whole-body FDG-PET imaging for staging of Hodgkin's disease and lymphoma,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 343–348, 1997. View at Google Scholar
  55. T. Klose, R. Leidl, I. Buchmann, H. J. Brambs, and S. N. Reske, “Primary staging of lymphomas: cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET versus computed tomography,” European Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 27, no. 10, pp. 1457–1464, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  56. N. G. Mikhaeel, M. Hutchings, P. A. Fields, M. J. O'Doherty, and A. R. Timothy, “FDG-PET after two to three cycles of chemotherapy predicts progression-free and overall survival in high-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 16, no. 9, pp. 1514–1523, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  57. A. Gallamini, F. Fiore, R. Sorasio, and M. Meignan, “Interim positron emission tomography scan in Hodgkin lymphoma: definitions, interpretation rules, and clinical validation,” Leukemia and Lymphoma, vol. 50, no. 11, pp. 1761–1764, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  58. A. Gallamini, C. Patti, S. Viviani et al., “Early chemotherapy intensification with BEACOPP in advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma patients with a interim-PET positive after two ABVD courses,” British Journal of Haematology, vol. 152, no. 5, pp. 551–560, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  59. D.-H. Yang, J.-J. Min, H.-C. Song et al., “Prognostic significance of interim 18F-FDG PET/CT after three or four cycles of R-CHOP chemotherapy in the treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma,” European Journal of Cancer, vol. 47, no. 9, pp. 1312–1318, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  60. C. Yoo, D. H. Lee, J. E. Kim et al., “Limited role of interim PET/CT in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with R-CHOP,” Annals of Hematology, vol. 90, pp. 797–802, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  61. A. S. Michallet, J. Trotman, and C. Tychyj-Pinel, “Role of early PET in the management of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma,” Current Opinion in Oncology, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 414–418, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  62. G. Jerusalem, Y. Beguin, M. F. Fassotte et al., “Persistent tumor 18F-FDG uptake after a few cycles of polychemotherapy is predictive of treatment failure in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma,” Haematologica, vol. 85, no. 6, pp. 613–618, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  63. K. Spaepen, S. Stroobants, P. Dupont et al., “Early restaging positron emission tomography with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose predicts outcome in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 1356–1363, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  64. K. Spaepen, S. Stroobants, G. Verhoef, and L. Mortelmans, “Positron emission tomography with [18F]FDG for therapy response monitoring in lymphoma patients,” European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, vol. 30, no. 1, supplement, pp. S97–S105, 2003. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  65. L. Kostakoglu, M. Coleman, J. P. Leonard, I. Kuji, H. Zoe, and S. J. Goldsmith, “Pet predicts prognosis after 1 cycle of chemotherapy in aggressive lymphoma and Hodgkin's disease,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 43, no. 8, pp. 1018–1027, 2002. View at Google Scholar
  66. C. Lin, E. Itti, C. Haioun et al., “Early 18F-FDG PET for prediction of prognosis in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: SUV-based assessment versus visual analysis,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 48, no. 10, pp. 1626–1632, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  67. W. A. Weber, “18F-FDG PET in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: qualitative or quantitative?” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 48, no. 10, pp. 1580–1582, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  68. M. Hutchings, N. G. Mikhaeel, P. A. Fields, T. Nunan, and A. R. Timothy, “Prognostic value of interim FDG-PET after two or three cycles of chemotherapy in Hodgkin lymphoma,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 16, no. 7, pp. 1160–1168, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  69. B. Cheson, “The case against heavy PETing,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 27, no. 11, pp. 1742–1743, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  70. P. L. Zinzani, V. Stefoni, M. Tani et al., “Role of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scan in the follow-up of lymphoma,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 27, no. 11, pp. 1781–1787, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  71. U. Petrausch, P. Samaras, S. R. Haile et al., “Risk-adapted FDG-PET/CT-based follow-up in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma after first-line therapy,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 21, no. 8, pp. 1694–1698, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  72. G. Jerusalem, Y. Beguin, M. F. Fassotte et al., “Early detection of relapse by whole-body positron emission tomography in the follow-up of patients with Hodgkin's disease,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 123–130, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  73. C. Bodet-Milin, F. Kraeber-Bodéré, P. Moreau, L. Campion, B. Dupas, and S. Le Gouill, “Investigation of FDG-PET/CT imaging to guide biopsies in the detection of histological transformation of indolent lymphoma,” Haematologica, vol. 93, no. 3, pp. 471–472, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  74. A. M. Tsimberidou, W. G. Wierda, W. Plunkett et al., “Phase I-II study of oxaliplatin, fludarabine, cytarabine, and rituximab combination therapy in patients with Richter's syndrome or fludarabine- refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 196–203, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  75. A. Noy, H. Schöder, M. Gönen et al., “The majority of transformed lymphomas have high standardized uptake values (SUVs) on positron emission tomography (PET) scanning similar to diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL),” Annals of Oncology, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 508–512, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed