Time course of tumor SUV in18F-FDG PET of breast cancer: Presentation of a simple model using a single reference point for time corrections of tumor SUVs

Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Volumn 52, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 18-23

  Stahl, Alexander R ^a   Heusner, Till A ^a   Hartung, Verena ^a   Nagarajah, James ^a   Bockisch, Andreas ^a   Hahn, Steffen ^a   Antoch, Gerald ^a   Jentzen, Walter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ESSEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Exposure time; Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG); Positron emission tomography (PET); Standardized uptake value (SUV)

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

ADULT; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG TUMOR LEVEL; ERROR; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REFERENCE VALUE; TIME;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

EID: 79851505525     PISSN: 01615505     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.110.077461     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Thie JA. Understanding the standardized uptake value, its methods, and implications for usage. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:1431-1434. (Pubitemid 47618494)
2. Boellaard R, O'Doherty MJ, Weber WA, et al. FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging - version 1.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:181-200.
3. Stahl A, Ott K, Schwaiger M, Weber WA. Comparison of different SUV-based methods for monitoring cytotoxic therapy with FDG PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:1471-1478.
4. Hamberg LM, Hunter GJ, Alpert NM, Choi NC, Babich JW, Fischman AJ. The dose uptake ratio as an index of glucose metabolism: useful parameter or over-simplification? J Nucl Med. 1994;35:1308-1312.
5. Basu S, Kung J, Houseni M, Zhuang H, Tidmarsh GF, Alavi A. Temporal profile of fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in malignant lesions and normal organs over extended time periods in patients with lung carcinoma: implications for its utilization in assessing malignant lesions. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;53:9-19.
6. Wong CY, Noujaim D, Fu HF, et al. Time sensitivity: a parameter reflecting tumor metabolic kinetics by variable dual-time F-18 FDG PET imaging. Mol Imaging Biol. 2009;11:283-290.
7. Thie JA, Hubner KF, Smith GT. Optimizing imaging time for improved performance in oncology PET studies. Mol Imaging Biol. 2002;4:238-244. (Pubitemid 34705227)
8. 18F-FDG PET of breast cancer: characterization and method to adjust for time differences. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1044-1050.
9. Jakoby BW, Bercier Y, Conti M, et al. Performance investigation of a time-of-flight PET/CT scanner. In: Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2008:3738-3739.
10. Panin VY, Kehren F, Michel C, Casey M. Fully 3-D PET reconstruction with system matrix derived from point source measurements. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2006;25:907-921. (Pubitemid 44088375)
11. Jentzen W. Experimental investigation of factors affecting the absolute coefficients in iodine-124 PET lesions imaging. Phys Med Biol. 2010;21:2365-2398.
12. Kadrmas DJ, Casey ME, Black NF, Hamill JJ, Panin VY, Conti M. Experimental comparison of lesion detectability for four fully-3D PET reconstruction schemes. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2009;28:523-534.