This review compiles and standardizes various PET/CT scoring systems for improved interpretation in oncology, suggesting enhanced diagnostic accuracy.
[ 18 F]FDG PET/CT (fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET/computed tomography) imaging, integrating functional and anatomical information for various oncological workups, has shown better diagnostic accuracy than anatomical imaging alone, along with a prognostic role. But as a glucose analogue, it has multiple physiological/benign uptake in various organs and conditions in the human body, creating heterogeneity in reporting scan findings worldwide and thus making interpretation difficult for clinicians. Therefore, there is a growing demand to standardise PET/CT reports using validated scoring systems for better interpretation across various oncological evaluations. This article aimed to concisely compile and review various oncological [ 18 F]FDG PET/CT scoring systems, as proposed in the literature and validated for routine practice in oncology, with appropriate representative images as examples for better understanding or interpretation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Patro et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: