Recommendations of the Spanish Societies of Radiation Oncology (SEOR), Nuclear Medicine & Molecular Imaging (SEMNiM), and Medical Physics (SEFM) on 18F-FDG PET-CT for radiotherapy treatment planning

Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy

Volumn 17, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 298-318

  Caballero Perea, Begoña ^a   Villegas, Antonio Cabrera ^b   Rodríguez, José Miguel Delgado ^c   Velloso, María José García ^d   Vicente, Ana María García ^e   Cabrerizo, Carlos Huerga ^f   López, Rosa Morera ^g   Romasanta, Luis Alberto Pérez ^e   Beltrán, Moisés Sáez ^a  

^a HOSPITAL UNIVERSITARIO DE FUENLABRADA   (Spain)

^b CENTER FOR BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH OF LA RIOJA CIBIR   (Spain)

^c HOSPITAL UNIVERSITARIO 12 DE OCTUBRE   (Spain)

^d UNIVERSITY CLINIC OF NAVARRA   (Spain)

^e HOSPITAL GENERAL UNIVERSITARIO DE CIUDAD REAL   (Spain)

^f HOSPITAL UNIVERSITARIO LA PAZ   (Spain)

^g HOSPITAL RAMÓN Y CAJAL   (Spain)

Author keywords

Contouring; CT; Delineation; PET; PET CT; Radiotherapy planning

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

ARTICLE; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; IMMOBILIZATION; INVOLUNTARY MOVEMENT; MEDICAL SOCIETY; NUCLEAR MEDICINE; PATIENT CARE; PATIENT POSITIONING; QUALITY CONTROL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RADIATION DOSE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT CONTRAINDICATION;

EID: 84870765171     PISSN: 15071367     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.rpor.2012.10.001     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Report 83. J ICRU 2010, 10(1). Oxford University Press. 10.1093/jicru/ndq009.
2. Prescribing, recording and reporting photon beam therapy (supplement to ICRU report 50). ICRU report 62.
3. Malicki J. The importance of accurate treatment planning, delivery, and dose verification. Rep Pract Onco Radiother 2012, 17(March (2)):63-65.
4. Facey K., Bradbury I., Laking G., Payne E. Overview of the clinical effectiveness of positron emission tomography imaging in selected cancers. Health Technol Assess 2007, 11(October (44)). iii-iv, xi-267.
5. Delbeke D., Schöder H., Martin W.H., Wahl R.L. Hybrid imaging (SPECT/CT and PET/CT): improving therapeutic decisions. Semin Nucl Med 2009, 39(September (5)):308-340.
6. MUFACE Guía PET-CT. Protocolo de Prescripción 2011, Mutualidad General de Funcionarios Civiles del Estado, Madrid. http://www.muface.es/.
7. MacManus M., Nestle U., Rosenzweig K.E., et al. Use of PET and PET/CT for radiation therapy planning: IAEA expert report 2006-2007. Radiother Oncol 2009, 91(April (1)):85-94.
8. The role of PET/CT in radiation treatment planning for cancer patient treatment. IAEA, VIENNA 2008, IAEA-TECDOC-1603.
9. PET in radiotherapy planning. Radiother Oncol 2010, 96(September (3)):275-356.
10. Mutic S. Patient positioning, immobilization devices, and fiducial markers in positron emission tomography-computed tomography scanner-based radiation therapy simulation. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2010, 31(December (6)):462-467.
11. Utilidad de la PET-TAC en Oncología. Arán ediciones 2010, Madrid.
12. 18F]-FDG-PET and PET-CT in the planning of radiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): the technical basis. ICRU-target volumes, problems, perspectives. Radiother Oncol 2006, 81(November (2)):209-225.
13. van Dalen J.A., Vogel W.V., Corstens F.H.M., Oyen W.J.G. Multi-modality nuclear medicine imaging: artefacts, pitfalls and recommendations. Cancer Imaging 2007, 7(May (1)):77-83.
14. 18F-fluorodesoxiglucosa. Rev Esp Med Nucl 2009, 28:85-89.
15. SERAM recommendations. Available online at: [accessed 09.09.12]. http://seram.es/index.php%3Foption=com_content%26view=article%26id=838%26Itemid=204.
16. Otero H.J., Yap J.T., Patak M.A., et al. Evaluation of low-density neutral oral contrast material in PET/CT for tumor imaging: results of a randomized clinical trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009, 193(August (2)):326-332.
17. Dizendorf E., Hany T.F., Buck A., von Schulthess G.K., Burger C. Cause and magnitude of the error induced by oral CT contrast agent in CT-based attenuation correction of PET emission studies. J Nucl Med 2003, 44(May (5)):732-738.
18. Bannas P., Weber C., Adam G., et al. Contrast-enhanced [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography for staging and radiotherapy planning in patients with anal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011, 81(October (2)):445-451.
19. Boellaard R., O'Doherty M.J., Weber W.A., 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(January (1)):181-200.
20. 18F-FDG PET/CT 1.0. J Nucl Med 2006, 47(May (5)):885-895.
21. Coffey M., Vaandering A. Patient setup for PET/CT acquisition in radiotherapy planning. Radiother Oncol 2010, 96(September (3)):298-301.
22. Sattler B., Lee J.A., Lonsdale M., Coche E. PET/CT (and CT) instrumentation, image reconstruction and data transfer for radiotherapy planning. Radiother Oncol 2010, 96(September (3)):288-297.
23. 18F-FDG. Radiat Prot Dosim 2010, 139(1-3):208-213.
24. Pujades Claumarchirant M.C., Martí Vidal J.F., Olivas Arroyo C., Bello Arqués P., Mateo Navarro A. Application of ICRP-103 in the calculation of effective dose associated to nuclear medicine tests. Rev Esp Med Nucl 2010, 29(June (3)):114-121.
25. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to evaluate cervical node metastases in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008, 100(May (10)):712-720.
26. Troost E.G.C., Schinagl D.A.X., Bussink J., Oyen W.J.G., Kaanders J.H.A.M. Clinical evidence on PET-CT for radiation therapy planning in head and neck tumours. Radiother Oncol 2010, 96(September (3)):328-334.
27. Hellwig D., Baum R.P., Kirsch C. FDG-PET, PET/CT and conventional nuclear medicine procedures in the evaluation of lung cancer: a systematic review. Nuklearmedizin 2009, 48(2):59-69. quiz N8-9.
28. Shimizu S., Hosokawa M., Itoh K., Fujita M., Takahashi H., Shirato H. Can hybrid FDG-PET/CT detect subclinical lymph node metastasis of esophageal cancer appropriately and contribute to radiation treatment planning? A comparison of image-based and pathological findings. Int J Clin Oncol 2009, 14(October (5)):421-425.
29. Cook G.J., Fogelman I., Maisey M.N. Normal physiological and benign pathological variants of 18-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron-emission tomography scanning: potential for error in interpretation. Semin Nucl Med 1996, 26(October (4)):308-314.
30. Keyes J.W. SUV: standard uptake or silly useless value?. J Nucl Med 1995, 36(October (10)):1836-1839.
31. Weber W.A. Quantitative analysis of PET studies. Radiother Oncol 2010, 96(September (3)):308-310.
32. Boellaard R., Oyen W.J.G., Hoekstra C.J., et al. The Netherlands protocol for standardisation and quantification of FDG whole body PET studies in multi-centre trials. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008, 35(December (12)):2320-2333.
33. Boellaard R. Standards for PET image acquisition and quantitative data analysis. J Nucl Med 2009, 50(May (Suppl. 1)):11S-20S.
34. 18F-FDG PET as an indicator of therapeutic response in patients in National Cancer Institute Trials. J Nucl Med 2006, 47(June (6)):1059-1066.
35. Ling C.C., Humm J., Larson S., et al. Towards multidimensional radiotherapy (MD-CRT): biological imaging and biological conformality. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000, 47(June (3)):551-560.
36. 18F PET signals for automatic target volume definition in radiotherapy treatment planning. Radiother Oncol 2006, 80(July (1)):43-50.
37. Bentzen S.M. High-tech in radiation oncology: should there be a ceiling?. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004, 58(February (2)):320-330.
38. Zaidi H., El Naqa I. PET-guided delineation of radiation therapy treatment volumes: a survey of image segmentation techniques. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010, 37(November (11)):2165-2187.
39. Lee J.A. Segmentation of positron emission tomography images: some recommendations for target delineation in radiation oncology. Radiother Oncol 2010, 96(September (3)):302-307.
40. Erdi Y.E., Mawlawi O., Larson S.M., et al. Segmentation of lung lesion volume by adaptive positron emission tomography image thresholding. Cancer 1997, 80(December (12 Suppl.)):2505-2509.
41. Daisne J.-F., Sibomana M., Bol A., Doumont T., Lonneux M., Grégoire V. Tri-dimensional automatic segmentation of PET volumes based on measured source-to-background ratios: influence of reconstruction algorithms. Radiother Oncol 2003, 69(December (3)):247-250.
42. Hoffmann A.L., van Dalen J.A., Lee J., et al. Assessment of (18)F PET signals for automatic target volume definition in radiotherapy treatment planning. Radiother Oncol 2007, 83(April (1)):102-103. author reply 103.
43. King M.A., Long D.T., Brill A.B. SPECT volume quantitation: influence of spatial resolution, source size and shape, and voxel size. Med Phys 1991, 18(October (5)):1016-1024.
44. 18F-FDG PET definition of gross tumor volume for radiotherapy of non-small cell lung cancer: is a single standardized uptake value threshold approach appropriate?. J Nucl Med 2006, 47(November (11)):1808-1812.
45. Zaidi H. Organ volume estimation using SPECT. IEEE Trans Nuclear Sci 1996, 43(June (3)):2174-2182.
46. Yaremko B., Riauka T., Robinson D., et al. Thresholding in PET images of static and moving targets. Phys Med Biol 2005, 50(December (24)):5969-5982.
47. Geets X., Lee J.A., Bol A., Lonneux M., Grégoire V. A gradient-based method for segmenting FDG-PET images: methodology and validation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007, 34(September (9)):1427-1438.
48. Fogh S., Farach A., Intenzo C., et al. Pathologic correlation of PET-CT based auto contouring for radiation planning in lung cancer. Bodine J [Internet] 2010, 3(December (1)). Available from: http://jdc.jefferson.edu/bodinejournal/vol3/iss1/30.
49. Long D.T., King M.A., Sheehan J Comparative evaluation of image segmentation methods for volume quantitation in SPECT. Med Phys 1992, 19(April (2)):483-489.
50. Protocolo Español de Control de Calidad en Radiodiagnóstico (Aspectos técnicos) SEFM/SEPR 2003.
51. Protocolo Español de Control de Calidad en Sistemas de Planificación de Terapia con Radiaciones Ionizantes 2002, SEFM.
52. Control de Calidad de Equipos TC para Radioterapia Guía Práctica. Del Grupo GOCO Revista Física Méd 2005, 6(1):37-45.
53. Mutic S., Palta J.R., Butker E.K., et al. Quality assurance for computed-tomography simulators and the computed-tomography-simulation process: report of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 66. Med Phys 2003, 30(October (10)):2762-2792.
54. Quality Assurance for PET and PET/CT System. IAEA HUMAN HEALTH SERIES 2009.
55. Protocolo Nacional de Control de Calidad en la Instrumentación en Medicina Nuclear 1999, SEFM, SEMN, SEPR.
56. Clinical PET-CT in radiology (integrated imaging in oncology) 2008, Springer. P. Shreve, D.W. Townsend (Eds.).
57. Hubbell, Seltzer SM. Tables of X-ray mass attenuation coefficients and mass energy-absorption coefficients 1keV to 20meV for elements z=1 to 92 and 48 additional substances of dosimetric interest. Available at: [accessed 09.09.12]. http://www.nist.gov/pml/data/xraycoef/index.cfm.
58. Daisne J.-F., Duprez T., Weynand B., et al. Tumor volume in pharyngolaryngeal squamous cell carcinoma: comparison at CT, MR imaging, and FDG PET and validation with surgical specimen. Radiology 2004, 233(October (1)):93-100.
59. Riegel A.C., Bucci M.K., Mawlawi O.R., et al. Target definition of moving lung tumors in positron emission tomography: correlation of optimal activity concentration thresholds with object size, motion extent, and source-to-background ratio. Med Phys 2010, 37(April (4)):1742-1752.
60. Faasse T., Shreve P. Patient and image data management in positron emission tomography-computed tomography for radiation therapy and therapy response assessment. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2010, 31(December (6)):480-489.