Volume-of-interest assessment of oncologic response using 18F-FDG PET/CT: A phantom study

Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology

Volumn 39, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 14-18

  Pérez López, Berenice ^a   Vega González, Iván Fabricio ^a   Estrada Lobato, Enrique ^a   Ṕrez Molina, Jesús ^b   Torres Mendoza, Blanca Miriam ^b,c   Medina, Luis Alberto ^d  

^a INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE CANCEROLOGÍA   (Mexico)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GUADALAJARA   (Mexico)

^c INSTITUTO MEXICANO DEL SEGURO SOCIAL   (Mexico)

^d UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO   (Mexico)

Author keywords

Oncological treatment response; PET CT; Volume of interest (VOI)

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; MEASUREMENT; PHANTOM; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RADIOACTIVITY; TECHNIQUE; TUMOR NECROSIS;

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; NECROSIS; NEOPLASMS; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; SOFTWARE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 79953688253     PISSN: 00914916     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2967/jnmt.110.078410     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Park JO, Lee SI, Song SY, et al. Measuring response in solid tumors: comparison of RECIST and WHO response criteria. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2003;33:533-537.
2. Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, Winkler A. Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer. 1981;47:207-214.
3. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009; 45:228-247.
4. Therasse P, Eisenhauer EA, Verweij J. RECIST revisited: a review of validation studies on tumour assessment. Eur J Cancer. 2006;42:1031-1039.
5. Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge MA. From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med. 2009;50(suppl 1):122S-150S.
6. Terasawa T, Nagai H. Current clinical evidence on interim fluorine-18 fluorodeoxy glucose positron emission tomography for advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma to predict treatment outcomes. Leuk Lymphoma. 2009;50:1750-1752.
7. Iagaru AH, Mittra ES, McDougall IR, Quon A, Gambhir SS. 18F-FDG PET/CT evaluation of patients with ovarian carcinoma. Nucl Med Commun. 2008;29: 1046-1051.
8. Podoloff DA, Advani RH, Allred C, et al. NCCN task force report: positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) scanning in cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2007;(5 suppl 1):S1-S22.
9. Behzadi A, Ung Y, Lowe V, Deschamps C. The role of positron emission tomography in the management of non-small cell lung cancer. Can J Surg. 2009;52: 235-242.
10. Campana D, Ambrosini V, Pezzilli R, et al. Standardized uptake values of 68Ga-DOTANOC PET: a promising prognostic tool in neuroendocrine tumors. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:353-359.
11. Berkowitz A, Basu S, Srinivas S, Sankaran S, Schuster S, Alavi A. Determination of whole-body metabolic burden as a quantitative measure of disease activity in lymphoma: a novel approach with fluorodeoxyglucose-PET. Nucl Med Commun. 2008;29:521-526.
12. Berghmans T, Dusart M, Paesmans M, et al. Primary tumor standardized uptake value (SUVmax) measured on fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) is of prognostic value for survival in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a systematic review and meta-analysis (MA) by the European Lung Cancer Working Party for the IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project. J Thorac Oncol. 2008;3:6-12.
13. Hoang JK, Hoagland LF, Coleman RE, Coan AD, Herndon JE II, Patz EF Jr. Prognostic value of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging in patients with advanced-stage non-small-cell lung carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:1459-1464.
14. Veit-Haibach P, Schaefer NG, Steinert HC, Soyka JD, Seifert B, Stahel RA. Combined FDG-PET/CT in response evaluation of malignant pleural mesothelioma. Lung Cancer. 2010;67:311-317.
15. Terasawa T, Nihashi T, Hotta T, Nagai H. 18F-FDG PET for posttherapy assessment of Hodgkin's disease and aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: a systematic review. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:13-21.
16. Akhurst T, Ng V, Larson SM, et al. Tumor burden assessment with positron emission tomography with [18-F] 2-fluoro 2-deoxyglucose (FDG PET) modeled in metastatic renal cell cancer. Clin Positron Imaging. 2000;3: 57-65.
17. Boucek JA, Francis RJ, Jones CG, Khan N, Turlach BA, Green AJ. Assessment of tumour response with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography using three-dimensional measures compared to SUVmax: a phantom study. Phys Med Biol. 2008;53:4213-4230.
18. Francis RJ, Byrne MJ, van der Schaaf AA, et al. Early prediction of response to chemotherapy and survival in malignant pleural mesothelioma using a novel semiautomated 3-dimensional volume-based analysis of serial 18F-FDG PET scans. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1449-1458.
19. Larson SM, Erdi Y, Akhurst T, et al. Tumor treatment response based on visual and quantitative changes in global tumor glycolysis using PET-FDG imaging: the visual response score and the change in total lesion glycolysis. Clin Positron Imaging. 1999;2:159-171.
20. Fiebrich HB, Brouwers AH, Kerstens MN, et al. 6-[F-18]Fluoro-L-dihydroxyphenylalanine positron emission tomography is superior to conventional imaging with 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine scintigraphy, computer tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging in localizing tumors causing catecholamine excess. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009;94:3922-3930.
21. Veit-Haibach P, Vogt FM, Jablonka R, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of contrastenhanced FDG-PET/CT in primary staging of cutaneous malignant melanoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36:910-918.
22. Green AJ, Francis RJ, Baig S, Begent RH. Semiautomatic volume of interest drawing for 18F-FDG image analysis: method and preliminary results. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:393-406.
23. de Geus-Oei LF, van der Heijden HF, Visser EP, et al. Chemotherapy response evaluation with 18F-FDG PET in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1592-1598.
24. Lee P, Weerasuriya DK, Lavori PW, et al. Metabolic tumor burden predicts for disease progression and death in lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;69:328-333.