The imaging techniques can be classified into two main groups: Structural/morphological imaging (SMI), which includes X rays (XR), computed tomography (CT), ultrasounds (US) as well as some varieties of magnetic resonance (MRI), and shows anatomic-morphological aspects, and molecular imaging (MI), which includes nuclear medicine (SPECT, PET), fMRI, optical and nanosystems techniques, and provides information about biochemistry/biological activity, often before structural changes. According to Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, MI “is the visualization, characterization, and measurement of biological processes at the molecular and cellular levels in humans and other living systems”. MI procedures are noninvasive, safe and painless. Its sensitivity is greater than SMI, but it lacks anatomical detail, which has led to the development of multimodal imaging, combining structural and molecular techniques, widely used at present in daily practice. The pillars of MI are biochemistry/biology, instrumentation and software, and its cycle is the following: study of biology/biochemistry of a process, establishment/definition of specific targets, and development of tracers, preclinical imaging, histological validation and finally clinical imaging. This new concept led to the individualized diagnostic and treatment, being the patient the center of the medical activity. “As opposed to the doctor-centric, curative model of the past, the future is going to be patient-centric and proactive” said Dr. Zerhouni (NIH Medline Plus Winter 2007). The doctor must adapt to the needs of the own patient and this fact requires a true change of heart, because MI is intimately tied to the biology of the disease to analyzing. A new and strong interrelationship came into being: a bidirectional system biology-imaging that will allow to be much more effective in the daily practice, not only in relation to diagnosis (specific and early), but also with therapy (guide cancer treatment selection and evaluate early treatment response). There is an absolute necessity to lock the two together. Likewise, in the future the biology of a disease will indicate us what is the most adequate imaging technique and vice versa. In this regard, we know that in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), ALK+ status is associated with distinct characteristics at CT imaging (CT radiogenomic characterization) [1], and that in lung adenocarcinomas 18F-FDG uptake values are related with expression levels of cellular Glucose Transporters and EGFR mutations. For this reason, different EGFR mutations correlate with different FDG uptake values.