Diagnostic accuracy of 18F choline PET/CT using time-of-flight reconstruction algorithm in prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence

Clinical Nuclear Medicine

Volumn 39, Issue 3, 2014, Pages

  Hausmann, Daniel ^a   Bittencourt, Leonardo K ^b   Attenberger, Ulrike I ^a   Sertdemir, Metin ^a   Weidner, Anja ^a   Büsing, Karen A ^a   Brade, Joachim ^c   Wenz, Frederik ^a   Schoenberg, Stefan O ^a   Dinter, Dietmar J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

^b FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF RIO DE JANEIRO   (Brazil)

^c Institute of Medical Statisticsa   (Germany)

Author keywords

18F choline PET CT; oncology; prostate cancer; time of flight

Indexed keywords

CHOLINE; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; DRUG DERIVATIVE; FLUOROMETHYLCHOLINE;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; MALE; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGY; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PROSTATE TUMOR; RADIOGRAPHY; SCINTISCANNING; TUMOR RECURRENCE;

ALGORITHMS; CHOLINE; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MALE; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; OBSERVER VARIATION; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84894089736     PISSN: 03639762     EISSN: 15360229     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RLU.0b013e3182a23d37     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Crawford ED. Epidemiology of prostate cancer. Urology. 2003;62(6 suppl 1):3-12. (Pubitemid 38050194)
2. Brawley OW. Prostate cancer epidemiology in the United States. World J Urol. 2012;30:195-200.
3. Lois C, Jakoby BW, Long MJ, et al. An assessment of the impact of incorporating time-of-flight information into clinical PET/CT imaging. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:237-245.
4. McConnell JD, Bruskewitz R, Walsh P, et al. The effect of finasteride on the risk of acute urinary retention and the need for surgical treatment among men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Finasteride Long-Term Efficacy and Safety Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:557-563. (Pubitemid 28114643)
5. Kadrmas DJ, Casey ME, Conti M, et al. Impact of time-of-flight on PET tumor detection. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:1315-1323.
6. Conti M, Bendriem B, Casey M, et al. First experimental results of time-offlight reconstruction on an LSO PET scanner. Phys Med Biol. 2005;50:4507-4526. (Pubitemid 41361514)
7. Ter-Pogossian MM, Mullani NA, Ficke DC, et al. Photon time-of-flight-assisted positron emission tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1981;5:227-239. (Pubitemid 11139585)
8. Budinger TF. Time-of-flight positron emission tomography: status relative to conventional PET. J Nucl Med. 1983;24:73-78. (Pubitemid 13190003)
9. Karp JS, Surti S, Daube-Witherspoon ME, et al. Benefit of time-of-flight in PET: experimental and clinical results. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:462-470. (Pubitemid 351355213)
10. Surti S, Kuhn A, Werner ME, et al. Performance of Philips Gemini TF PET/CT scanner with special consideration for its time-of-flight imaging capabilities. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:471-480. (Pubitemid 47604933)
11. Surti S, Scheuermann J, El Fakhri G, et al. Impact of time-of-flight PET on whole-body oncologic studies: a human observer lesion detection and localization study. J Nucl Med. 2011;52:712-719.
12. 11C]choline-PET/CT depends on the serum PSA-value in patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:18-23. (Pubitemid 350234152)
13. Stephenson AJ, Kattan MW, Eastham JA, et al. Defining biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: a proposal for a standardized definition. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:3973-3978. (Pubitemid 46630746)
14. 18F-FDG PET/CT for cancer staging. J Nucl Med Technol. 2012;40:255-258.
15. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:228-247.
16. Surti S, Karp JS, Popescu LM, et al. Investigation of time-of-flight benefit for fully 3-D PET. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2006;25:529-538.
17. Surti S, Karp JS. Experimental evaluation of a simple lesion detection task with time-of-flight PET. Phys Med Biol. 2009;54:373-384.
18. Goethals I, D'Asseler Y, Dobbeleir A, et al. The effect of acquisition time on visual and semi-quantitative analysis of F-18 FDG-PET studies in patients with head and neck cancer. Nucl Med Commun. 2010;31:227-231.
19. Braendengen M, Hansson K, Radu C, et al. Delineation of gross tumor volume (GTV) for radiation treatment planning of locally advanced rectal cancer using information from MRI or FDG-PET/CT: a prospective study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;81:e439-e445.
20. Pawlowski JM, Yang ES, Malcolm AW, et al. Reduction of dose delivered to organs at risk in patients with prostate cancer via image-guided radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010;76:924-934.
21. Esthappan J, Chaudhari S, Santanam L, et al. Prospective clinical trial of positron emission tomography/computed tomography image-guided intensityY modulated radiation therapy for cervical carcinoma with positive para-aortic lymph nodes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;72:1134-1139.
22. Murray I, Kalemis A, Glennon J, et al. Time-of-flight PET/CT using lowactivity protocols: potential implications for cancer therapy monitoring. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:1643-1653.