Liver SULmean at FDG PET/CT: Interreader agreement and impact of placement of volume of interest

Radiology

Volumn 267, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 596-601

  Viner, Maya ^a   Mercier, Gustavo ^a   Hao, Frank ^a   Malladi, Ashish ^a   Subramaniam, Rathan M ^a  

^a BOSTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERREADER AGREEMENT; LIVER MEAN STANDARDIZED UPTAKE VALUE NORMALIZED TO LEAN BODY MASS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; PORTAL VEIN; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; VOLUME OF INTEREST; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; LIVER; MIDDLE AGED; REFERENCE VALUE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SCINTISCANNING; VERY ELDERLY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; LIVER; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; REFERENCE VALUES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

MLCS; MLOWN;

EID: 84876934468     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.12121385     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Hillner BE, Siegel BA, Liu D, et al. Impact of positron emission tomography/computed tomography and positron emission tomography (PET) alone on expected management of patients with cancer: initial results from the National Oncologic PET Registry. J Clin Oncol 2008;26(13):2155-2161.
2. Wilcox BE, Subramaniam RM, Peller PJ, et al. Utility of integrated computed tomography-positron emission tomography for selection of operable malignant pleural mesothelioma. Clin Lung Cancer 2009;10(4):244-248.
3. Karantanis D, O'Neill BP, Subramaniam RM, et al. Contribution of F-18 FDG PETCT in the detection of systemic spread of primary central nervous system lymphoma. Clin Nucl Med 2007;32(4):271-274.
4. Imsande HM, Davison JM, Truong MT, et al. Use of 18F-FDG PET/CT as a predictive biomarker of outcome in patients with headand-neck non-squamous cell carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;197(4):976-980.
5. Davison JM, Ozonoff A, Imsande HM, Grillone GA, Subramaniam RM. Squamous cell carcinoma of the palatine tonsils: FDG standardized uptake value ratio as a biomarker to differentiate tonsillar carcinoma from physiologic uptake. Radiology 2010;255(2):578-585.
6. Benz MR, Evilevitch V, Allen-Auerbach MS, et al. Treatment monitoring by 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with sarcomas: interobserver variability of quantitative parameters in treatment-induced changes in histopathologically responding and nonresponding tumors. J Nucl Med 2008;49(7):1038-1046.
7. Kumar R, Xiu Y, Yu JQ, et al. 18F-FDG PET in evaluation of adrenal lesions in patients with lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2004; 45(12):2058-2062.
8. Yun M, Kim W, Alnafisi N, Lacorte L, Jang S, Alavi A. 18F-FDG PET in characterizing adrenal lesions detected on CT or MRI. J Nucl Med 2001;42(12):1795-1799.
9. Carr R, Barrington SF, Madan B, et al. Detection of lymphoma in bone marrow by whole-body positron emission tomography. Blood 1998;91(9):3340-3346.
10. Delbeke D, Martin WH, Sandler MP, Chapman WC, Wright JK Jr., Pinson CW. Evaluation of benign vs malignant hepatic lesions with positron emission tomography. Arch Surg 1998;133(5):510-515; discussion 515-516.
11. Yoshida Y, Kurokawa T, Sawamura Y, et al. Comparison of 18F-FDG PET and MRI in assessment of uterine smooth muscle tumors. J Nucl Med 2008;49(5):708-712.
12. 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.
13. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33(1):159-174.
14. Boellaard R. Standards for PET image acquisition and quantitative data analysis. J Nucl Med 2009;50(Suppl 1):11S-20S.
15. Hatt M, Visvikis D, Le Rest CC. Autocontouring versus manual contouring. J Nucl Med 2011;52(4):658; author reply 658-659.
16. Krak NC, Boellaard R, Hoekstra OS, Twisk JW, Hoekstra CJ, Lammertsma AA. Effects of ROI definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005;32(3):294-301.
17. Nakamoto Y, Zasadny KR, Minn H, Wahl RL. Reproducibility of common semi-quantitative parameters for evaluating lung cancer glucose metabolism with positron emission tomography using 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose. Mol Imaging Biol 2002;4(2): 171-178.
18. Nahmias C, Wahl LM. Reproducibility of standardized uptake value measurements determined by 18F-FDG PET in malignant tumors. J Nucl Med 2008;49(11):1804-1808.
19. 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(3):847-850.
20. Paquet N, Albert A, Foidart J, Hustinx R. Within-patient variability of (18)F-FDG: standardized uptake values in normal tissues. J Nucl Med 2004;45(5):784-788.
21. Minn H, Zasadny K, Quint L, Wahl R. Lung cancer: reproducibility of quantitative measurements for evaluating 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose uptake at PET. Radiology 1995;196(1):167-173.
22. Hofman MS, Smeeton NC, Rankin SC, Nunan T, O'Doherty MJ. Observer variation in interpreting 18F-FDG PET/CT findings for lymphoma staging. J Nucl Med 2009;50(10):1594-1597.
23. Ramos CD, Erdi YE, Gonen M, et al. FDGPET standardized uptake values in normal anatomical structures using iterative reconstruction segmented attenuation correction and filtered back-projection. Eur J Nucl Med 2001;28(2):155-164.