Quantitative approaches of dynamic FDG-PET and PET/CT studies (dPET/CT) for the evaluation of oncological patients

Cancer Imaging

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 283-289

  Dimitrakopoulou Strauss, Antonia ^a   Pan, Leyun ^a   Strauss, Ludwig G ^a  

^a GERMAN CANCER RESEARCH CENTER DKFZ   (Germany)

Author keywords

Compartment modelling; Dynamic PET; Feature extraction; Non compartment modelling; Oncology; Parametric imaging

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

BLOOD VOLUME; CANCER PATIENT; COMPARTMENT MODEL; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; DISTRIBUTION VOLUME; HUMAN; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; ONCOLOGY; REVIEW; SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINE; TUMOR DIAGNOSIS;

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; NEOPLASMS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS;

EID: 84867912248     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14707330     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1102/1470-7330.2012.0033     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. 18F-FDG studies in patients with primary and recurrent soft-tissue sarcomas: impact on diagnosis and correlation with grading. J Nucl Med 2001; 42: 713-720. PMid:11337565.
2. Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Hoffmann M, Bergner R, et al. Prediction of short-term survival in patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer following chemotherapy based on 2-deoxy-2-(F-18)-fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography: a feasibility study. Mol Imaging Biol 2007; 9: 308-317. doi:10.1007/s11307-007-0103-6. PMid:17623254.
3. Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Hohenberger P, Pan L, Kasper B, Roumia S, Strauss LG. Dynamic PET (dPET) with FDG in patients with unresectable aggressive fibromatosis: regression-based parametric images and correlation to the FDG kinetics based on a two-tissue compartment mode. Clin Nucl Med 2012; in press. PMid:21220970.
4. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomographic data acquisition in predicting midterm outcome of liver metastases secondary to gastrointestinal stromal tumours. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011; 38: 1212-223. doi:10.1007/s00259-011-1776-2. PMid:21400009.
5. Strauss LG, Conti PS. The applications of PET in clinical oncology. J Nucl Med 1991; 32: 623-648. PMid:2013803.
6. Mikolajczyk K, Szabatin M, Rudnicki P, Grodzki M, Burger C. A Java environment for medical image data analysis: initial application for brain PET quantitation. Med Inform 1998; 23: 207-214. doi:10.3109/14639239809001400. (Pubitemid 28451333)
7. Burger C, Buck A. Requirements and implementations of a flexible kinetic modeling tool. J Nucl Med 1997; 38: 1818-1823. PMid:9374364.
8. Patlak CS, Blasberg RG. Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants from multiple-time uptake data. Generalizations. J Cereb Flow Metab 1985; 5: 584-590. doi:10.1038/jcbfm.1985.87. (Pubitemid 16218234)
9. Ohtake T, Kosaka N, Watanabe T, et al. Noninvasive method to obtain input function for measuring glucose utilization of thoracic and abdominal organs. J Nucl Med 1991; 32: 1432-1438. PMid:2066802.
10. 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose rate constants in the anesthetized baboon brain with dynamic positron tomography. J Neurosci Methods 1993; 50: 263-272. doi:10.1016/0165-0270(93)90033-N. PMid:8152238.
11. Sokoloff L, Smith CB. Basic principles underlying radioisotopic methods for assay of biochemical processes in vivo. In: Greitz T, Ingvar DH, Widén L, editors. The metabolism of the human brain studied with positron emission tomography. New York: Raven Press; 1983, p. 123-148.
12. Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Strauss LG, Burger C, et al. On the fractal nature of positron emission tomography (PET) studies. World J Nucl Med 2003; 4: 306-313.
13. 18F-FDG studies. J Nucl Med 2011; 52: 379-385. doi:10.2967/jnumed.110.079798. PMid:21321263.
14. Pan L, Mikolajczyk K, Strauss L, Haberkorn U, Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A. Machine learning based parameter imaging and kinetic modeling of PET data. J Nucl Med 2007; 48: 158P.
15. Messa C, Choi Y, Hoh CK, Jakobs EL, et al. Quantification of glucose utilization in liver metastases: parametric imaging of FDG uptake with PET. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1992; 16: 684-689. doi:10.1097/00004728-199209000-00003. PMid:1522257.
16. Dougherty G. A comparison of the texture of computed tomography and projection radiography images of vertebral trabecular bone using fractal signature and lacunarity. Med Eng Phys 2001; 23: 313-321. doi:10.1016/S1350- 4533(01)00048-0. PMid: 11435145.
17. Oka K, Kumasaka S, Kashima I. Assessment of bone feature parameters from lumbar trabecular skeletal patterns using mathematical morphology image processing. J Bone Miner Metab 2002; 20: 201-208. doi:10.1007/s007740200029. PMid:12115065.