1. Savir-Baruch B, Schuster DM. Prostate Cancer Imaging with 18F-Fluciclovine. PET Clin. 2022 Oct;17(4):607-620. doi: 10.1016/j.cpet.2022.07.005. 2. Glaser ZA, Rais-Bahrami S. Fluciclovine positron emission tomography in the setting of biochemical recurrence following local therapy of prostate cancer. Transl Androl Urol. 2018 Oct;7(5):824-830. 3. Zanoni L, Bossert I, Matti A, Schiavina R, Pultrone C, Fanti S, Nanni C. A review discussing fluciclovine (18F) PET/CT imaging in the detection of recurrent prostate cancer. Future Oncol. 2018 May;14(11):1101-1115.

- † CE-MRI: contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging; EMA: European Medicines Agency; FDA: Food and Drug Administration; Kinetic stability: in vitro measurement (pH 1.0, 25ºC). - Runge VM. Safety of the gadolinium-based contrast agents for magnetic resonance imaging, focusing in part on their accumulation in the brain and especially the dentate nucleus. Invest Radiol. 2016;51:273–279. - Semelka RC, Ramalho J, Vakharia A, et al. Gadolinium deposition disease: initial description of a disease that has been around for a while. Magn Reson Imaging. 2016;34:1383–1390. - McDonald RJ, Weinreb JC, Davenport MS. Symptoms associated with gadolinium exposure (SAGE): a suggested term. Radiology. 2022;302:270–273. - Shahid I. Alvin Joseph A. Lancelot, E. Use of Real-Life Safety Data From International Pharmacovigilance Databases to Assess the Importance of Symptoms Associated With Gadolinium Exposure. Investigative Radiology. 2022; 57;10:664-673. - Id´ee JM. et al., Possible involvement of gadolinium chelates in the pathophysiology of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: a critical review. Toxicology, 2008, 248, 77–88.

NA

1- Sun S, Bonaffini PA, Nougaret S, et al. How to differentiate uterine leiomyosarcoma from leiomyoma with imaging. Diagn Interv Imaging 2019; 100:619-634. 2- Juhasz-Böss I, Gabriel L, Bohle RM, Horn LC, Solomayer E-F,Breitbach G-P. Uterine leiomyosarcoma. Oncol Res Treat 2018; 41: 680-6. 3- Wu T-I,Yen T-C,Lai C-H.Clinical presentation and diagnosis of uterine sarcoma, including imaging. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2011; 25: 681-9. 4-Tamai K, Koyama T, Saga T, Morisawa N, Fujimoto K, Mikami Y, et al. The utility of diffusion-weighted MR imaging for differentiating uterine sarcomas from benign leiomyomas. Eur Radiol 2008; 18:723-30. 5- Foti P. V., Tilocca C., Sigona A., Palmucci S., Farina R., Caltabiano R., et al. Benign neoplasms of the uterus: MR imaging of leiomyomas with radiologic-pathologic correlation. WCRJ 2015;2(2): e516. 6-Wilde S, Scott-Barrett S. Radiological appearances of uterine fibroids. Indian J Radiol Imaging. 2009;19(3):222-31. 7-Arleo EK, Schwartz PE, Hui P, McCarthy S. Review of leiomyoma variants. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015; 205: 912-21. 8-Lall C, Bura V, Lee TK, Bhosale P, Faria SC, Choi J-I, et al. Diffusion-Weighted imaging in hemorrhagic abdominal and pelvic lesions: restricted diffusion can mimic malignancy. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2018; 43: 1772-84. 9-Murase E, Siegelman ES, Outwater EK, Perez-Jaffe LA, Tureck RW. Uterine leiomyomas: histopathologic features, MR imaging findings, differential diagnosis, and treatment. Radiographics 1999; 19: 1179-97. 10-Ueda H, Togashi K, Konishi I, Kataoka ML, Koyama T, Fujiwara T, et al. Unusual appearances of uterine leiomyomas: MR imaging findings and their histopathologic backgrounds. Radiographics 1999; 19 Spec No: S131-45 11- Smith J, Zawaideh JP, Sahin H, Freeman S, Bolton H, Addley HC. Differentiating uterine sarcoma from leiomyoma: BET1T2ER Check! Br J Radiol 2021;94(1125):20201332. 12-Bi Q, Xiao Z, Lv F, Liu Y, Zou C, Shen Y. Utility of clinical parameters and multiparametric MRI as predictive factors for differentiating uterine sarcoma from atypical leiomyoma. Acad Radiol 2018; 25: 993-1002. 13- Skorstad M, Kent A, Lieng M. Preoperative evaluation in women with uterine leiomyosarcoma. A nationwide cohort study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2016; 95: 1228-34.

Bibliography 1. Hereditary renal cell carcinoma syndromes: diagnosis, surveillance and management. Eamonn R. Maher1. World Journal of Urology (2018) 36:1891–1898 2. Whole-Body MRI Surveillance of Cancer Predisposition Syndromes: Current Best Practice Guidelines for Use, Performance, and Interpretation. Angelo Don Grasparil II1,2 Ravi V. ottumukkala3 Mary-Louise C. Greer1,2 Michael S. Gee3. AJR 2020; 215:1002–1011 3. Birt-Hogg-Dubé syndrome-associated renal cell carcinoma: Histopathological features and diagnostic conundrum. Mitsuko Furuya1 | Hisashi Hasumi2 | Masahiro Yao2 | Yoji Nagashima3. Cancer Science. 2020;111:15–22. 4. Association Between Birt Hogg Dubé Syndrome and Cancer Predisposition. Raffaele Palmirotta1, Annalisa Savonarola1, Giorgia Ludovici1, Pietro Donati2, Francesco Cavaliere3, Maria Laura de Marchis1, Patrizia Ferroni1 and Fiorella Guadagni1. Anticancer Research 30: 751-758 (2010) 5. Clinical and Genetic Comparison of Birt–Hogg–Dubé Syndrome (Hornstein–Knickenberg Syndrome) in Chinese: A Systemic Review of Reported Cases. Wangji Zhou1,*, Keqiang Liu2,3,*, Kai-Feng Xu1, Yaping Liu4, Xinlun Tian. International Journal of General Medicine 2022:15 5111–5121 6. Renal imaging in 199 Dutch patients with Birt-Hogg-Dube ́ syndrome: Screening compliance and outcome. Johannesma PC, van de Beek I, van der Wel TJWT, Reinhard R, Rozendaal L, Starink TM, et al. (2019) . PLoS ONE 14(3): e0212952. 7. Imaging findings of hereditary renal tumors, a review of what the radiologist should know. Marcin Czarnieckia,⁎, Rabindra Gautamb, Peter L. Choykea, Baris Turkbeya. European Journal of Radiology 101 (2018) 8-16.