Table 1 68Ga-Pentixafor imaging in hematological and solid cancer patients
Tumor type | Authors | Year | Study Type | Sample size | Main findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lymphoproliferative cancers | Wester et al. [73] | 2015 | Proof-of-concept | 4 | Validation of the feasibility of 68Ga-Pentixafor in cancer patients Excellent imaging in TCL with NSCLC, DLBCL, CLL ,MM |
MM | Herrmann et al. [74] | 2015 | Pilot-study | 5 | Biodistribution and dosimetry of 68Ga-Pentixafor |
| Â | Philipp et al. [75] | 2015 | Pilot-study | 14 | Complementary to 18F-FDG in lesion detection |
| Â | Lapa et al. [78] | 2017 | Retrospective | 35 | 68Ga-Pentixafor positivity was a negative prognostic factor Complementary to 18F-FDG in lesion detection |
| Â | Pan et al. [79] | 2020 | Prospective | 30 | 68Ga-Pentixafor was promising in imaging diagnosis of MM |
| Â | Shekhawat et al. [80] | 2022 | Retrospective | 34 | 68Ga-Pentixafor was apt to MM diagnosis and staging |
MCL | Mayerhoefer et al. [81] | 2021 | Prospective | 22 | 68Ga-Pentixafor revealed higher detection rates and better tumor-to-background contrast than 18F-FDG |
| Â | Mayerhoefer et al. [82] | 2023 | Retrospective | 16 | 68Ga-Pentixafor presented superior treatment assessment than MRI |
MZL | Duell et al. [83] | 2021 | Retrospective | 16 | 68Ga-Pentixafor is promising in imaging diagnosis of MZL |
CNSL | Herhaus et al. [84] | 2020 | Proof-of-concept | 11 | 68Ga-Pentixafor is promising in imaging diagnosis of CNSL 68Ga-Pentixafor has treatment response prediction value |
| Â | Starzer et al. [85] | 2021 | Prospective | 7 | 68Ga-Pentixafor is promising in monitor of CNSL |
| Â | Chen et al. [86] | 2022 | Retrospective | 26 | 68Ga-Pentixafor is superior in detection of CNSL lesions than 18F-FDG |
WM/LPL | Luo et al. [87] | 2019 | Prospective | 17 | 68Ga-Pentixafor is a promising agent for WM/LPL detection |
| Â | Pan et al. [88] | 2021 | Prospective | 15 | 68Ga-Pentixafor is superior in post chemotherapy response assessment than 18F-FDG |
MALT | Haug et al. [89] | 2019 | Prospective | 36 | 68Ga-Pentixafor is promising in MALT detection |
| Â | Mayerhoefer et al. [90] | 2022 | Prospective | 46 | 68Ga-Pentixafor is promising in treatment assessment of MALT |
Glioblastoma | Lapa et al. [91] | 2016 | Pilot-study | 15 | 68Ga-Pentixafor has potential for patient selection of CXCR4 directed treatment |
| Â | Jacobs et al. [92] | 2022 | Pilot-study | 7 | 68Ga-Pentixafor imaging is not strictly correlated to IHC staining |
Solid and hematologic | Buck et al. [93] | 2022 | Retrospective | 690 | High image contrast in hematologic, SCLC, adrenocortical cancer |
Solid cancers | Vag et al. [94] | 2016 | Proof-of-concept | 21 | Aid tumor diagnosis |
| Â | Werner et al. [95] | 2019 | Retrospective | 19 | Aid tumor diagnosis |
| Â | Serfling et al. [96] | 2022 | Retrospective | 90 | No tumor sink effect observed in solid cancer patients |
| Â | Hartrampf et al. [97] | 2023 | Retrospective | 50 | Interobserver agreement rates of 68Ga-Pentixafor imaging |
Breast cancer | Vag et al. [98] | 2018 | Retrospective | 18 | Not suitable for breast cancer general diagnosis |
NEC | Weich et al. [99] | 2021 | Retrospective | 11 | Aid tumor diagnosis |