Henning Reis

Prof. Dr. Henning Reis

West German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

21Years (2006-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
9 February 2017 in Environmental and Molecular Mutagenesis
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
NGNatalie R Gassman
Natalie R Gassman

15 February 2008 in Bioconjugate Chemistry
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
YKYounggyu Kim
Younggyu Kim
SHSam O. Ho
Sam O. Ho
NGNatalie R Gassman
Natalie R Gassman
YKYou Korlann
You Korlann
ELElizabeth V. Landorf
Elizabeth V. Landorf
SWShimon Weiss
Shimon Weiss

1 January 2008 in Journal of Hepatology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
KSKlaus Juergen Schmitz
Klaus Juergen Schmitz
JWJeremias Wohlschlaeger
Jeremias Wohlschlaeger
HLHauke Lang
Hauke Lang
GSGeorgios Charalambos Sotiropoulos
Georgios Charalambos Sotiropoulos
MMMassimo Malago
Massimo Malago
HBHideo Andreas Baba
Hideo Andreas Baba

1 January 2007 in Biophysical Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
NLNam Ki Lee
Nam Ki Lee
AKAchillefs N. Kapanidis
Achillefs N. Kapanidis
HKHye Ran Koh
Hye Ran Koh
YKYou Korlann
You Korlann
SHSam On Ho
Sam On Ho
SWShimon Weiss
Shimon Weiss

1 September 2016 in Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
TSTibor Szarvas
Tibor Szarvas
OMOrsolya Módos
Orsolya Módos
CNChristian Niedworok
Christian Niedworok
Henning ReisHenning Reis
Henning Reis
ASAttila Szendröi
Attila Szendröi
PNPéter Nyirády
Péter Nyirády

6 February 2014 in Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PHPhilipp Heusch
Philipp Heusch
CBChristian Buchbender
Christian Buchbender
Jens KöhlerJens Köhler
Jens Köhler
FNFelix Nensa
Felix Nensa
TGThomas Gauler
Thomas Gauler
THTill A. Heusner
Till A. Heusner
Therapeutic decisions in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients depend on the tumor stage. PET/CT with (18)F-FDG is widely accepted as the diagnostic standard of care. The purpose of this study was to compare a dedicated pulmonary (18)F-FDG PET/MR imaging protocol with (18)F-FDG PET/CT for primary and locoregional lymph node staging in NSCLC patients using histopathology as the reference. Twenty-two patients (12 men, 10 women; mean age ± SD, 65.1 ± 9.1 y) with histopathologically confirmed NSCLC underwent (18)F-FDG PET/CT, followed by (18)F-FDG PET/MR imaging, including a dedicated pulmonary MR imaging protocol. T and N staging according to the seventh edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging manual was performed by 2 readers in separate sessions for (18)F-FDG PET/CT and PET/MR imaging, respectively. Results from histopathology were used as the standard of reference. The mean and maximum standardized uptake value (SUV(mean) and SUV(max), respectively) and maximum diameter of the primary tumor was measured and compared in (18)F-FDG PET/CT and PET/MR imaging. PET/MR imaging and (18)F-FDG PET/CT agreed on T stages in 16 of 16 of patients (100%). All patients were correctly staged by (18)F-FDG PET/CT and PET/MR (100%), compared with histopathology. There was no statistically significant difference between (18)F-FDG PET/CT and (18)F-FDG PET/MR imaging for lymph node metastases detection (P = 0.48). For definition of thoracic N stages, PET/MR imaging and (18)F-FDG PET/CT were concordant in 20 of 22 patients (91%). PET/MR imaging determined the N stage correctly in 20 of 22 patients (91%). (18)F-FDG PET/CT determined the N stage correctly in 18 of 22 patients (82%). The mean differences for SUV(mean) and SUV(max) of NSCLC in (18)F-FDG PET/MR imaging and (18)F-FDG PET/CT were 0.21 and -5.06. These differences were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The SUV(mean) and SUV(max) measurements derived from (18)F-FDG PET/CT and (18)F-FDG PET/MR imaging exhibited a high correlation (R = 0.74 and 0.86, respectively; P < 0.0001). Size measurements showed an excellent correlation between (18)F-FDG PET/MR imaging and (18)F-FDG PET/CT (R = 0.99; P < 0.0001). The lower and upper limits of agreement between (18)F-FDG PET/CT and (18)F-FDG PET/MR imaging using Bland-Altman analysis were -2.34 to 3.89 for SUV(mean), -7.42 to 4.40 for SUV(max), and -0.59 to 0.83 for the tumor size, respectively. (18)F-FDG PET/MR imaging using a dedicated pulmonary MR imaging protocol, compared with (18)F-FDG PET/CT, does not provide advantages in thoracic staging in NSCLC patients.