Computer-Assisted Quantitative Evaluation of Therapeutic Responses for Lymphoma Using Serial PET/CT Imaging

Academic Radiology

Volumn 17, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 479-488

  Gao, Xin ^a   Xue, Zhong ^a   Xing, Jiong ^a   Lee, Daniel Y ^a   Gottschalk, Stephen M ^b   Heslop, Helen E ^b   Bollard, Catherine M ^b   Wong, Stephen T C ^a  

^a HOUSTON METHODIST HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b TEXAS CHILDREN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

longitudinal registration of serial images; Lymphoma; PET CT; quantitative evaluation of treatment outcomes

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER IMMUNOTHERAPY; CANCER PATIENT; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED THERAPY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; LYMPHOMA; MALE; METABOLISM; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT MONITORING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RADIOLOGIST; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TREATMENT RESPONSE; TUMOR VOLUME;

ADULT; ALGORITHMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; LYMPHOMA; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATTERN RECOGNITION, AUTOMATED; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SUBTRACTION TECHNIQUE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 77649335932     PISSN: 10766332     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2009.10.026     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Jemal A., Siegel R., Ward E., et al. Cancer statistics, 2008. CA Cancer J Clin 58 (2008) 71-96
2. Morton L.M., Turner J.J., Cerhan J.R., et al. Proposed classification of lymphoid neoplasms for epidemiologic research from the Pathology Working Group of the International Lymphoma Epidemiology Consortium (InterLymph). Blood 110 (2007) 695-708
3. Hoppe R., Mauch P.M., Armitage J.O., et al. Hodgkin lymphoma (2007), Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, PA
4. Antoch G., Freudenberg L.S., Debatin J.F., et al. A radiologist's perspective on dual-modality PET/CT: optimized CT scanning protocols and their effect on PET quality. J Nucl Med 43 (2002) 307
5. Bar-Shalom R., Yefremov N., Guralnik L., et al. Clinical performance of PET/CT in evaluation of cancer: additional value for diagnostic imaging and patient management. J Nucl Med 44 (2003) 1200-1209
6. Coleman R.E., Delbeke D., Guiberteau M.J., et al. Concurrent PET/CT with an integrated imaging system: intersociety dialogue from the joint working group of the American College of Radiology, the Society of Nuclear Medicine, and the Society of Computed Body Tomography and Magnetic Resonance. J Nucl Med 46 (2005) 1225-1239
7. Ell P.J. The contribution of PET/CT to improved patient management. Br J Radiol 79 (2006) 32-36
8. Farma J.M., Santillan A.A., Melis M., et al. PET/CT fusion scan enhances CT staging in patients with pancreatic neoplasms. Ann Surg Oncol 15 (2008) 2465-2471
9. Sironi S., Messa C., Mangili G., et al. Integrated FDG PET/CT in patients with persistent ovarian cancer: correlation with histologic findings. Radiology 233 (2004) 433-440
10. Schiepers C., Filmont J.E., and Czernin J. PET for staging of Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 30 Suppl 1 (2003) S82-S88
11. Hutchings M., and Barrington S.F. PET/CT for therapy response assessment in lymphoma. J Nucl Med 50 Suppl 1 (2009) 21S-30S
12. Weber W.A. Assessing tumor response to therapy. J Nucl Med 50 Suppl 1 (2009) 1S-10S
13. Kostakoglu L., and Goldsmith S.J. F-18-FDG PET evaluation of the response to therapy for lymphoma and for breast, lung, and colorectal carcinoma. J Nucl Med 44 (2003) 224-239
14. Kuo P.H., Carlson K.R., Christensen I., et al. FDG-PET/CT for the evaluation of response to therapy of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma to vorinostat (suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid, SAHA) in a phase II trial. Mol Imaging Biol 10 (2008) 306-314
15. De Barsy C., Depas G., Dresse M.F., et al. Whole-body FDG PET imaging as a method for staging and early assessment of treatment response in pediatric patients with lymphoma. J Nucl Med 44 (2003) 346
16. Eich H.T., Kobe C., Dietlein M., et al. FDG-PET for treatment response assessment in advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma-report on the 2nd interim analysis of GHSG trial HD15. Strahlenther Und Onkol 184 (2008) 11
17. Moulin-Romsee G., Spaepen K., Stroobants S., et al. Cost-effectiveness of early treatment response assessment by PET in non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Molec Imaging 34 (2007) S242
18. Pregno P., Chiappella A., Bello M., et al. Response assessment in aggressive non Hodgkin lymphoma disease: predictive value of mid-treatment evaluation by 18-FDG-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET). Ann Oncol 19 (2008) 249-250
19. Pregno P., Chiappella A., Penna D., et al. Predictive value of response assessment with mid-treatment evaluation of 18-FDG-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET) in aggressive non Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Haematologica Hematol J 92 (2007) 59-60
20. Stroobants S., Brepoels L., Thomas J., et al. PET-CT for treatment response assessment in lymphoma. Haematologica Hematol J 92 (2007) 20
21. Fueger B.J., Yeom K., Czernin J., et al. Comparison of CT, PET, and PET/CT for staging of patients with indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Mol Imaging Biol 11 (2009) 269-274
22. Hernandez-Maraver D., Hernandez-Navarro F., Gomez-Leon N., et al. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography: diagnostic accuracy in lymphoma. Br J Haematol 135 (2006) 293-302
23. Macapinlac H.A. The utility of 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose-positron emission tomography and combined positron emission tomography and computed tomography in lymphoma and melanoma. Mol Imaging Biol 6 (2004) 200-207
24. Ngeow J.Y., Quek R.H., Ng D.C., et al. High SUV uptake on FDG-PET/CT predicts for an aggressive B-cell lymphoma in a prospective study of primary FDG-PET/CT staging in lymphoma. Ann Oncol 20 (2009) 1543-1547
25. Yan J.Y., Zhao B.S., Curran S., et al. Automated matching and segmentation of lymphoma on serial CT examinations. Med Phys 34 (2007) 55-62
26. Pekar V., Kaus M.R., and McNutt T. 3D image segmentation. Office USPaT ed. 3D image segmentation (2009), Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands City
27. Sofka M., and Stewart C.V. Location registration and recognition (LRR) for longitudinal evaluation of corresponding regions in CT volumes. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv Int Conf Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 11 (2008) 989-997
28. Duncan J., and Ayache N. Medical image analysis: progress over two decades and the challenges ahead. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 22 (2000) 85-106
29. Rueckert D., Sonoda L.I., Hayes C., et al. Nonrigid registration using free-form deformations: application to breast MR images. IEEE Transactions Med Imaging 18 (1999) 712-721
30. Marsland S., Twining C.J., and Taylor C. A minimum description length objective function for group-wise non-rigid image registration. Image Vision Comput 26 (2008) 333-346
31. Xue Z, Wong K, Wong STC. Joint registration and segmentation of serial lung CT images for image-guided lung cancer diagnosis and therapy. Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics;34:55-60.
32. Bollard C.M., Gottschalk S., Leen A.M., et al. Complete responses of relapsed lymphoma following genetic modification of tumor-antigen presenting cells and T-lymphocyte transfer. Blood 110 (2007) 2838-2845
33. Jenkinson M., and Smith S. A global optimisation method for robust affine registration of brain images. Med Image Anal 5 (2001) 143-156
34. Press W.H., Flannery B.P., Teukolsky S.A., et al. Numerical recipes in C (1992), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
35. Paragios N., Mellina-Gottardo O., and Ramesh V. Gradient vector flow fast geometric active contours. IEEE Trans Patt Anal Machine Intell 26 (2004) 402-407
36. Rueckert D., Frangi A.F., and Schnabel J.A. Automatic construction of 3-D statistical deformation models of the brain using nonrigid registration. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 22 (2003) 1014-1025
37. Ceresoli G., Zucali P., Van Hemert R., et al. Positron emission tomography with F18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG-PET) in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM): Prediction of response to chemotherapy by quantitative assessment of standard uptake value (SUV). Lung Cancer 49 (2005) S219
38. Keyes J.W. Suv-standard uptake or silly useless value. J Nucl Med 36 (1995) 1836-1839
39. Luo J. Estimate standard uptake value (SUV) in F18FDG PET tumor imaging. Med Phys 33 (2006) 2014-2015
40. Mahan S., and Ramsey C. Automatic generation of standard uptake value (SUV) isolines for treatment planning. Med Phys 30 (2003) 1429
41. Panizo C.M., Panizo E., Bosch J., et al. The maximum standard uptake value (SUVmax) of PET/CT correlates with lymphoma aggressivity. Ann Oncol 19 (2008) 250
42. Suzuki O., Morimoto M., Hashiguchi H., et al. Standardization of PET standard uptake value for delineating GTV in integrated PET-CT of head and neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 72 (2008) S409
43. Thie J.A. Understanding the standardized uptake value, its methods, and implications for usage. J Nucl Med 45 (2004) 1431-1434
44. Rosenberg S.A. National Cancer Institute sponsored study of classifications of non-Hodgkins lymphomas - summary and description of a working formulation for clinical usage. Cancer 49 (1982) 2112-2135
45. Vercauteren T., Pennec X., Perchant A., et al. Non-parametric diffeomorphic image registration with the demons algorithm. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv Int Conf Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 10 (2007) 319-326
46. Xue Z., Shen D., and Davatzikos C. Statistical representation of high-dimensional deformation fields with application to statistically constrained 3D warping. Med Image Anal 10 (2006) 740-751
47. Jenkinson M. FLIRT. Book FLIRT. v5.5 ed. Oxford, UK: University of Oxford. Available online: http://www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/flirt/index.html. Accessed November 20, 2009.