The PET-derived tumor-to-blood standard uptake ratio (SUR) is superior to tumor SUV as a surrogate parameter of the metabolic rate of FDG

EJNMMI Research

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 1-8

  van den Hoff, Jörg ^a,b   Oehme, Liane ^b   Schramm, Georg ^a   Maus, Jens ^a   Lougovski, Alexandr ^a   Petr, Jan ^a   Beuthien Baumann, Bettina ^a,b   Hofheinz, Frank ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF ION BEAM PHYSICS AND MATERIALS RESEARCH   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL CARL GUSTAV CARUS   (Germany)

Author keywords

FDG; PET; PET CT; SUV; Therapy response control; Tumor to blood ratio

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

ADULT; AGED; ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COLORECTAL LIVER METASTASIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HUMAN; LINEARITY; MALE; METABOLIC RATE; MIDDLE AGED; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS; TUMOR TO BLOOD STANDARD UPTAKE RATIO; VALIDITY;

EID: 84891385222     PISSN: None     EISSN: 2191219X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/2191-219X-3-77     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Patlak C, Blasberg R, Fenstermacher J: Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants frommultiple-time uptake data. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1983, 3:1-7.
2. Patlak C, Blasberg R: Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants frommultiple-time uptake data: generalizations. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1985, 5(4):584-590.
3. Wong W, Hicks K: A clinically practicalmethod to acquire parametric images of unidirectional metabolic rates and blood spaces. J Nucl Med 1994, 35(7):1206.
4. Zasadny KR, Wahl RL: Enhanced FDG-PET tumor imaging with correlation-coefficient filtered influx-constant images. J Nucl Med 1996, 37(2):371.
5. Hunter GJ, Hamberg LM, Alpert NM, Choi NC, Fischman AJ: Simplified measurement of deoxyglucose utilization rate. J Nucl Med 1996, 37(6):950-954.
6. Sadato N, Tsuchida T, Nakaumra S, Waki A, Uematsu H, Takahashi N, Hayashi N, Yonekura Y, Ishii Y: Non-invasive estimation of the net influx constant using the standardized uptake value for quantification of FDG uptake of tumours. Eur J Nucl Med 1998, 25(6):559-564.
7. Graham M, Peterson L, Hayward R: Comparison of simplified quantitative analyses of FDG uptake. Nucl Med Biol 2000, 27(7):647-655.
8. Sundaram SK, Freedman NM, Carrasquillo JA, Carson JM, Whatley M, Libutti SK, Sellers D, Bacharach SL: Simplified kinetic analysis of tumor 18F-FDG uptake: a dynamic approach. J Nucl Med 2004, 45(8):1328-1333.
9. van den Hoff J, Hofheinz F, Oehme L, Schramm G, Langner J, Beuthien-Baumann B, Steinbach J, Kotzerke J: Dual time point based quantification ofmetabolic uptake rates in 18F-FDG PET. EJNMMI Res 2013, 3:16.
10. Hamberg L, Hunter G, Alpert N, Choi N, Babich J, Fischman A: The dose uptake ratio as an index of glucose metabolism: useful parameter or oversimplification? J Nucl Med 1994, 35(8):1308.
11. Keyes Jr J: SUV: Standard uptake or silly useless value? J Nucl Med 1995, 36(10):1836-1839.
12. Huang S: Anatomy of SUV. Nucl Med Biol 2000, 27(7):643-646.
13. Sugawara Y, Zasadny KR, Neuhoff AW, Wahl RL: Reevaluation of the standardized uptake value for FDG: variations with body weight andmethods for correction. Radiology 1999, 213(2):521-525.
14. Kim CK, Gupta NC, Chandramouli B, Alavi A: Standardized uptake values of FDG: body surface area correction is preferable to body weight correction. J Nucl Med Official Publ, Soc Nucl Med 1994, 35:164.
15. ROVER: ROVER: ROI visualization, evaluation and image registration. Radeberg: ABX; 2008. http://www.abx.de/rover.
16. Hofheinz F, Pötzsch C, Oehme L, Beuthien-Baumann B, Steinbach J, Kotzerke J, van den Hoff J: Automatic volume delineation in oncological PET: evaluation of a dedicated software tool and comparison with manual delineation in clinical data sets. Nuklearmedizin 2012, 51:9-16.
17. R Development Core Team: R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2011. [ISBN 3-900051-07-0].
18. Kim C, 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 Commun 1996, 17(10):890-894.
19. Freedman N, Sundaram S, Kurdziel K, Carrasquillo J, Whatley M, Carson J, Sellers D, Libutti S, Yang J, Bacharach S: Comparison of SUV and Patlak slope for monitoring of cancer therapy using serial PET scans. Eur J Nucl MedMol Imaging 2003, 30:46-53.
20. Mak RH, Digumarthy SR, Muzikansky A, Engelman JA, Shepard JAO, Choi NC, Sequist LV: Role of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in predicting epidermal growth factor receptor mutations in non-small cell lung cancer. Oncologist 2011, 16(3):319-326.