Quantitative techniques in PET-CT imaging

Current Medical Imaging Reviews

Volumn 7, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 216-233

  Basu, Sandip ^a   Zaidi, Habib ^b,c,d   Holm, Søren ^e   Alavi, Abass ^f  

^a TATA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL   (India)

^b GENEVA UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS   (Switzerland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA   (Switzerland)

^d UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^e UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^f HOSPITAL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Hybrid imaging; Positron emission tomography (pet); Quantitative imaging; Standardized uptake value (suv)

Indexed keywords

ANTIINFECTIVE AGENT; FLUORINE 18; GLUCOSE; GLUCOSE 6 PHOSPHATASE; HEXOKINASE; INSULIN;

AGING; ALZHEIMER DISEASE; ARTICLE; ATHEROSCLEROSIS; AUTORADIOGRAPHY; BLOOD; BODY SIZE; BODY SURFACE; BODY WEIGHT; BRAIN ATROPHY; BRAIN FUNCTION; BRAIN SIZE; BRAIN VENTRICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREATHING PATTERN; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER STAGING; CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEM EXAMINATION; CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM; CEREBROSPINAL FLUID; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DRUG UPTAKE; FATTY LIVER; GLUCOSE BLOOD LEVEL; GLUCOSE METABOLISM; GLUCOSE TRANSPORT; GLYCOLYSIS; GRAY MATTER; HUMAN; HYPERINSULINEMIA; LEAN BODY WEIGHT; LIMB PROSTHESIS; LUNG CARCINOMA; LUNG NODULE; LUNG NON SMALL CELL CANCER; LUNG PARENCHYMA; LUNG TUMOR; METABOLIC RATE; NEUROIMAGING; NEUROLOGY; OBESITY; PARAAORTIC LYMPH NODE; PARTIAL VOLUME EFFECT; PHOSPHORYLATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STANDARDIZED UPTAKE VALUE; TREATMENT PLANNING; TUMOR VOLUME; WHITE MATTER; WHOLE BODY PET;

EID: 79961045207     PISSN: 15734056     EISSN: 18756506     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2174/157340511796411186     Document Type: Article

References (97)

1. Kinahan PE, Townsend DW, Beyer T, Sashin D. Attenuation cor-rection for a combined 3D PET/CT scanner. Med Phys 1998; 25: 2046-53.
2. Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T, et al. A combined PET/CT scan-ner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med 2000; 41: 1369-79.
3. Alavi A, Reivich M, Greenberg J, et al. Mapping of functional activity in brain with 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose. Semin Nucl Med 1981; 11: 24-31.
4. Reivich M, Alavi A, Wolf A, et al. Use of 2-deoxy-D[1-11C]glucose for the determination of local cerebral glucose metabolism in humans: variation within and between subjects. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1982; 2: 307-19.
5. Zaidi H, editor. Quantitative analysis in nuclear medicine imaging. New York: Springer; 2006.
6. Sokoloff L, Reivich M, Kennedy C, et al. The [14C]deoxyglucose method for the measurement of local cerebral glucose utilization: theory, procedure, and normal values in the conscious and anesthetized albino rat. J Neurochem 1977; 28: 897-916.
7. Reivich M, Kuhl D, Wolf A, et al. The [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose method for the measurement of local cerebral glucose utilization in man. Circ Res 1979; 44: 127-37.
8. Phelps ME, Huang SC, Hoffman EJ, Selin C, Sokoloff L, Kuhl DE. Tomographic measurement of local cerebral glucose metabolic rate in humans with (F-18)2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose: validation of method. Ann Neurol 1979; 6: 371-88.
9. Innis RB, Cunningham VJ, Delforge J et al. Consensus nomenclature for in vivo imaging of reversibly binding radioligands. J Cereb Blood Flow metabol 2007; 27: 1533-1539.
10. Hasselbalch SG, Madsen PL, Knudsen GM, Holm S, Paulson OB. Calculation of the FDG lumped constant by simultaneous measurement of global glucose and FDG metabolism in humans. J Cereb Blood Flow metabol 1998; 18: 154-160.
11. Hasselbalch SG, Holm S, Pedersen HS, et al. The F-18 FDG lumped constant determined in human brain from extraction fractions of FDG and glucose. J Cereb Blood Flow metabol 2001; 21: 995-1002.
12. Graham MM, Muzi M, Spence AM. The FDG lumped constant in normal human brain. J Nucl Med 2002; 43: 1157-66.
13. Wu HM, Bergsneider M, Glenn TC, et al. Measurement of the global lumped constant for FDG in normal human brain. Mol Imaging Biol 2003; 5: 32-41.
14. Gjedde A. Calculation of cerebral glucose phosphorylation from brain uptake of glucose analogs in vivo: A re-examination. Brain Res Rev1982; 4: 237-74.
15. Patlak CS, Blasberg RG, Fenstermacher JD. Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants from multiple-time uptake data. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1983; 3: 1-7.
16. Carson R. Tracer kinetic modeling in PET. In: Valk PE, Bailey DL, Townsend DW, Maisey MN, editors. Positron Emission Tomography: Basic Science and Clinical Practice. Chapter 4 ed. London: Springer-Verlag; 2003; 147-79.
17. Schmidt KC, Lucignani G, Sokoloff L. Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyclucose PET to determine regional cerebral glucose utilization: A reexamination. J Nucl Med 1996; 37: 394-399.
18. Hunter G, Hamberg L, Alpert N, Choi N, Fischman A. Simplified measurement of deoxyglucose utilization rate. J Nucl Med 1996; 37: 950-5.
19. Sandell A, Ohlsson T, Erlandsson K, Strand SE. An alternative method to normalize clinical FDG studies. J Nucl Med 1998; 39: 552-5.
20. Huang S-C. Anatomy of SUV. Nucl Med Biol 2000; 27: 643-6.
21. Minn H, Leskinen-Kallio S, Lindholm P, Bergman J, Ruotsalainen U, Teras M, et al. [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in tumors: kinetic vs. steady-state methods with reference to plasma insulin. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1993; 17: 115-23.
22. Kole A, Nieweg O, Pruim J, et al. Standardized uptake value and quantification of metabolism for breast cancer imagin with FDG and L-[1-11C]tyrosine PET. J Nuc Med 1997; 38: 692-6.
23. Keyes J. SUV: Standard Uptake Value or Silly useless Value? J Nucl Med.1995; 36: 1836-9.
24. Kim CK, Gupta N, Chandramouli B, Alavi A. Stardized uptake values of FDG: body surface area correction is preferable to body weight correction. J Nucl Med 1994; 35: 164-7.
25. Kim CK, Gupta N. Dependency of standardized uptake values of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose on body size: Comparison of body surface area correction and lean body mass correction. Nucl Med Commun1996;17: 890-4.
26. Gupta N, Frank A, Dewan N, et al. Solitary pulmonary nodules: detection of malignancy with PET with 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D- glucose. Radiology 1992; 184: 441-4.
27. Graham MM, Peterson LM, Hayward RM. Comparison of simpli-fied quantitative analyses of FDG uptake. Nucl Med Biol 2000; 27: 647-55.
28. Zasadny KR, Wahl RL. Standardized uptake values of normal tissues at PET with 2-[fluorine-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose: variations with body weight and a method for correction. Radiology 1993; 189: 847-50.
29. Avril N, Bense S, Ziegler SI, et al. Breast imaging with fluorine-18-FDG PET: quantitative image analysis. J Nucl Med 1997; 38: 1186-91.
30. Zhuang HM, Cortes-Blanco A, Pourdehnad M, et al. Do high glu-cose levels have differential effect on FDG uptake in inflammatory and malignant disorders? Nucl Med Commun 2001; 22: 1123-8.
31. 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 oversimplification? J Nucl Med 1994; 35: 1308-12.
32. Lodge M, Lucas J, Marsden P, Cronin B, Doherty OM, Smith M. A PET study of (18)FDG uptake in soft tissue masses. Eur J Nucl Med 1999; 26: 22-30.
33. Hustinx R, Smith RJ, Benard F, et al. Dual time point fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography: a potential method to differentiate malignancy from inflammation and normal tissue in the head and neck. Eur J Nucl Med 1999; 26: 1345-8.
34. Matthies A, Hickeson M, Cuchiara A, Alavi A. Dual time point 18F-FDG PET for the evaluation of pulmonary nodules. J Nucl Med 2002; 43: 871-5.
35. Boerner AR, Weckesser M, Herzog H, et al. Optimal scan time for fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med 1999; 26: 226-30.
36. Kumar R, Loving VA, Chauhan A, Zhuang H, Mitchell S, Alavi A. Potential of dual-time-point imaging to improve breast cancer diagnosis with 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2005; 46: 1819-24.
37. Mavi A, Urhan M, Yu JQ, et al. Dual time point 18F-FDG PET imaging detects breast cancer with high sensitivity and correlates well with histologic subtypes. J Nucl Med 2006; 47: 1440-6.
38. Ma SY, See LC, Lai CH, et al. Delayed (18)F-FDG PET for detec-tion of paraaortic lymph node metastases in cervical cancer patients. J Nucl Med 2003; 44: 1775-83.
39. Nishiyama Y, Yamamoto Y, Fukunaga K, et al. Dual-time-point 18F-FDG PET for the evaluation of gallbladder carcinoma. J Nucl Med 2006; 47: 633-8.
40. Spence AM, Muzi M, Mankoff DA, et al. 18F-FDG PET of glio-mas at delayed intervals: Improved distinction between tumor and normal gray matter. J Nucl Med 2004; 45:1653-9.
41. Zhuang H, Pourdehnad M, Lambright ES, et al. Dual time point 18F-FDG PET imaging for differentiating malignant from inflammatory processes. J Nucl Med 2001; 42: 1412-7.
42. Houseni M, Chamroonrat W, Bural G, et al. Alavi A. Promising role of dual time FDG-PET imaging in assessing focal and diffuse bone marrow disorders. J Nuc Med 2006; 47: 227P.
43. Chawluk J, Alavi A, Dann R, et al. Positron emission tomography in aging and dementia: effect of cerebral atrophy. J Nucl Med 1987; 28: 431-7.
44. Tanna NK, Kohn MI, Horwich DN, et al. Analysis of brain and cerebrospinal fluid volumes with MR imaging: impact on PET data correction for atrophy. Part II. Aging and Alzheimer dementia. Radiology. 1991; 178: 123-30.
45. Rousset OG, Ma Y, Evans AC. Correction for partial volume ef-fects in PET: principle and validation. J Nucl Med 1998; 39: 904-11.
46. Aston JA, Cunningham VJ, Asselin MC, Hammers A, Evans AC, Gunn RN. Positron emission tomography partial volume correction: estimation and algorithms. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2002; 22: 1019-34.
47. Quarantelli M, Berkouk K, Prinster A, et al. Integrated software for the analysis of brain PET/SPECT studies with partial-volume- effect correction. J Nucl Med2004; 45: 192-201.
48. Baete K, Nuyts J, Laere KV, et al. Evaluation of anatomy based reconstruction for partial volume correction in brain FDG-PET. NeuroImage 2004; 23: 305-17.
49. Zaidi H, Ruest T, Schoenahl F, Montandon M-L. Comparative evaluation of statistical brain MR image segmentation algorithms and their impact on partial volume effect correction in PET. Neuroimage 2006; 32: 1591-607.
50. Soret M, Bacharach SL, Buvat I. Partial-volume effect in PET tumor imaging. J Nucl Med 2007; 48: 932-45.
51. Zaidi H, Alavi A. Current trends in PET and combined (PET/CT and PET/MR) systems design. PET Clinics 2007; 2: 109-23.
52. Weber W, Young C, Abdel-Dayem HM, et al. Assessment of pulmonary lesions with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron imaging using coincidence mode gamma cameras. J Nucl Med 1999; 40: 574-8.
53. Rousset O, Rahmim A, Alavi A, Zaidi H. Partial volume correction strategies in PET. PET Clinics 2007; 2: 235-49.
54. Hickeson M, Yun M, Matthies A, et al. Use of a corrected standardized uptake value based on the lesion size on CT permits accurate characterization of lung nodules on FDG-PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002; 29: 1639-47.
55. Lubberink M, Tolmachev V, Widstrom C, Bruskin A, Lundqvist H, Westlin JE. 110mIn-DTPA-D-Phe1-octreotide for imaging of neuroendocrine tumors with PET. J Nucl Med 2002; 43: 1391-7.
56. Muller-Gartner HW, Links JM, Prince JL, et al. Measurement of radiotracer concentration in brain gray matter using positron emission tomography: MRI-based correction for partial volume effects. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1992; 12: 571-83.
57. Meltzer CC, Zubieta JK, Links JM, Brakeman P, Stumpf MJ, Frost JJ. MR-based correction of brain PET measurements for heterogeneous gray matter radioactivity distribution. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1996; 16: 650-8.
58. Kohn MI, Tanna NK, Herman GT, et al. Analysis of brain and cerebrospinal fluid volumes with MR imaging.Part I.Methods, reliability, and validation.Radiology 1991; 178:115-22.
59. Zhuge Y, Liu J, Udupa JK, Membership-based multiprotocol MR brain image segmentation. Medical Imaging 2003: Image Processing; 2003 2003/05/16/; San Diego, CA, USA. vol. 5032; pp 1572-9.
60. Bural GG, Torigian DA, Chamroonrat W, et al. Quantitative as-sessment of the atherosclerotic burden of the aorta by combined FDG-PET and CT image analysis: a new concept. Nucl Med Biol 2006; 33: 1037-43.
61. Basu S, Zaidi H, Houseni M, et al. Novel quantitative techniques for assessing regional and global function and structure based on modern imaging modalities: Implications for normal variation, aging and diseased states. Sem Nucl Med 2007; 37: 223-39.
62. Bural G, Torigian D, Burke A, et al. Quantitative assessment of the hepatic metabolic volume product in patients with diffuse hepatic steatosis and normal controls through use of FDG-PET and MR imaging: A novel concept. Mol Imaging Biol 2009; 12: 233-9.
63. 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: 521-6.
64. 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: 159-71.
65. Pham DL, Xu C, Prince JL. A survey of currents methods in medical image segmentation. Annual Reviews 2000; 2: 315-37.
66. van Baardwijk A, Baumert BG, Bosmans G, van Kroonenburgh M, Stroobants S, Gregoire V, et al. The current status of FDG-PET in tumour volume definition in radiotherapy treatment planning. Cancer Treat Rev 2006; 32: 245-60.
67. Zaidi H, Vees H, Wissmeyer M. Molecular PET/CT imaging-guided radiation therapy treatment planning. Acad Radiol 2009; 16: 1108-33.
68. 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: 1449-58.
69. Green A, Francis R, Baig S, Begent R. Semiautomatic volume of interest drawing for 18F-FDG image analysis - method and preliminary results. Eur J Nuc Med Mol Imaging [10.1007/s00259-007-0602-3]. 2008; 35: 393-406.
70. Behloul F, Lelieveldt BP, Boudraa A, Janier MF, Revel D, Reiber JH. Neuro-fuzzy systems for computer-aided myocardial viability assessment. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2001; 20:1302-13.
71. Slomka PJ, Radau P, Hurwitz GA, Dey D. Automated three-dimensional quantification of myocardial perfusion and brain SPECT. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2001; 25: 153-64.
72. Wong K-P, Dagan F, Meikle SR, Fulham MJ. Segmentation of dynamic PET images using cluster analysis. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2002; 49: 200-7.
73. Bentourkia Mh. A flexible image segmentation prior to parametric estimation. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2001; 25: 501-6.
74. Boudraa A, Cexus J-C, Zaidi H. Functional segmentation of dynamic nuclear medicine images by cross-PsiB energy operator. Comput Meth Prog Biomed 2006; 84: 148-54.
75. Zaidi H, Hasegawa BH. Determination of the attenuation map in emission tomography. J Nucl Med 2003; 44: 291-315.
76. Zaidi H, Xu XG. Computational anthropomorphic models of the human anatomy: The path to realistic Monte Carlo modeling in medical imaging. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2007; 9: 471-500.
77. Udupa JK, Odhner D, Samarasekera S, et al. 3DVIEWNIX: an open, transportable, multidimensional, multimodality, multiparametric imaging software system. Medical Imaging 1994: Image Capture, Formatting, and Display; 1994 1994/05/01/; Newport Beach, CA, USA. vol. 2164; pp. 58-73.
78. Thireou T, Kontaxakis G, Strauss LG, Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Pavlopoulos S, Santos A. Feasibility study of the use of similarity maps in the evaluation of oncological dynamic positron emission tomography images. Med Biol Eng Comput 2005; 43: 23-32.
79. Frouin V, Comtat C, Reilhac A, Gregoire M-C. Correction of partial volume effect for PET striatal imaging: fast implementation and study of robustness. J Nucl Med 2002; 43: 1715-26.
80. Schlemmer HP, Pichler BJ, Schmand M, et al. Simultaneous MR/PET imaging of the human brain: feasibility study. Radiology 2008; 248: 1028-35.
81. Zaidi H. Is MRI-guided attenuation correction a viable option for dual-modality PET/MR imaging? Radiology 2007; 244: 639-42.
82. Hofmann M, Pichler B, Schölkopf B, Beyer T. Towards quantitative PET/MRI: A review of MR-based attenuation correction techniques. Eur J Nuc Med Mol Imaging 2009; 36: 93-104.
83. Paulino AC, Thorstad WL, Fox T. Role of fusion in radiotherapy treatment planning. Semin Nucl Med 2003; 33: 238-43.
84. Zaidi H, El Naqa I. PET-guided delineation of radiation therapy treatment volumes: A survey of image segmentation techniques. 2010; 37: 2165-87.
85. Montgomery D, Amira A, Zaidi H. Fully automated segmentation of oncological PET volumes using a combined multiscale and statistical model. Med Phys 2007; 34: 722-36.
86. Hatt M, Cheze le Rest C, Turzo A, Roux C, Visvikis D. A fuzzy locally adaptive Bayesian segmentation approach for volume determination in PET. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2009; 28: 881-93.
87. Vees H, Senthamizhchelvan S, Miralbell R, Weber D, Ratib O, Zaidi H. Assessment of various strategies for 18F-FET PET-guided delineation of target volumes in high-grade glioma patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009; 36: 182-93.
88. Belhassen S, Llina Fuentes CS, Dekker A, De Ruysscher D, Ratib O, Zaidi H. Comparative methods for 18F-FDG PET-based delineation of target volumes in non-small-cell lung cancer [abstract]. J Nucl Med 2009; 50:27P.
89. Daisne JF, Sibomana M, Bol A, Doumont T, Lonneux M, Gregoire V. Tri-dimensional automatic segmentation of PET volumes based on measured source-to-background ratios: Influence of reconstruction algorithms. Radiother Oncol 2003; 69: 247-50.
90. Graves EE, Quon A, Loo BW, Jr. RT_Image: an open-source tool for investigating PET in radiation oncology. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2007; 6: 111-21.
91. Black QC, Grills IS, Kestin LL, et al. Defining a radiotherapy target with positron emission tomography. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 60: 1272-82.
92. Nestle U, Kremp S, Schaefer-Schuler A, S et al. Comparison of different methods for delineation of 18F-FDG PET-positive tissue for target volume definition in radiotherapy of patients with non- Small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2005; 46: 1342-8.
93. Boudraa AE, Champier J, Cinotti L, Bordet JC, Lavenne F, Mallet JJ. Delineation and quantitation of brain lesions by fuzzy clustering in positron emission tomography. Comput Med Imaging Graph 1996; 20: 31-41.
94. Belhassen S, Zaidi H A novel fuzzy C-means algorithm for unsupervised heterogeneous tumor quantification in PET Med Phys 2010; 37: 1309-24.
95. Basu S, Alavi A. Defining co-related parameters between 'metabolic' flare and 'clinical', 'biochemical', and 'osteoblastic' flare and establishing guidelines for assessing response to treatment in cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006; 34: 441-3.
96. Alavi A, Newberg AB, Souder E, Berlin JA. Quantitative analysis of PET and MRI data in normal aging and Alzheimer's disease: atrophy weighted total brain metabolism and absolute whole brain metabolism as reliable discriminators. J Nucl Med 1993; 34: 1681-7.
97. Weber DC, Zilli T, Buchegger F, et al. [(18)F]Fluoroethyltyrosine-positron emission tomography-guided radiotherapy for high-grade glioma. Radiat Oncol 2008; 3:44.