My collection of Nuclear Medicine Annuals starts in 1984 and it shows the evolution and progress of our field over more than two decades. However, this series of volumes does not describe the full history of developments. In the late 1960s I chose nuclear medicine as my primary field of professional interest, mainly because the principle of radiopharmaceuticals depicting the normal and abnormal biochemistry in the living human body by positron emission tomography (PET) attracted me. Since then we have come very far in this subspecialty, and PET has evolved into a standard of practice for clinical oncologists for the detection of primary and secondary malignancies as well as recurrence. In his preface, Leonard Freeman, the editor of this series for all these years, makes us realise that PET has been with us since the mid1950s. Notwithstanding the considerable developments in the area of PET radiopharmaceuticals, the flourishing use of PET would not have occurred without fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG), made available by various (commercial) institutions. And now we are entering another era: PET instrumentation that combines the morphological precision of computed tomography (CT) with the functional and metabolic information of FDG nuclear medicine, in the form of hybrid imaging. It is therefore logical that the first two chapters of this volume deal with combined PET/CT imaging in the diagnosis and management of solid tumours and lymphomas. A variety of other interesting topics in nuclear medicine are also covered in the 2003 edition of the annual. I found the review on the treatment of thyroid cancer very interesting as it puts the radioiodine treatment in the context of thyroglobulin determinations and the possibility of using recombinant thyroid-stimulating hormone. In addition, updates are provided on the use of skeletal scintigraphy in sport injuries and the use of radionuclide sentinel lymph node imaging in breast cancer management. The Annual also contains 30 pages on the literature highlights of 2002. I did not count the respective numbers of references, but did I see far more citations from the American literature than from the European literature? We Europeans still have to make ourselves more visible in the world, folks! To be serious again: as in past years, this is a fine and welcome contribution for those who wish to have the real update for “a book on the lap”. Let me make it clear to the doubters: there is no internet site where you could find such fine reviews.