Correction of scan time dependence of standard uptake values in oncological PET

EJNMMI Research

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 1-14

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

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

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL CARL GUSTAV CARUS   (Germany)

^c DRESDEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Dual time point; FDG; PET; SUR; SUV; Time dependence; Tumor to blood ratio; Uptake period

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COLORECTAL CANCER; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIALOGICAL PARAMETERS; STANDARD UPTAKE RATIO; STANDARD UPTAKE VALUE; TIME LAPSE IMAGING;

EID: 84899426001     PISSN: None     EISSN: 2191219X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/2191-219X-4-18     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. 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.
2. Keyes Jr J: SUV: Standard uptake or silly useless value? J Nucl Med 1995, 36(10):1836-1839.
3. Huang S: Anatomy of SUV. Nucl Med Biol 2000, 27(7):643-646.
4. Sugawara Y, Zasadny KR, Neuhoff AW, Wahl RL: Reevaluation of the standardized uptake value for FDG: variations with body weight and methods for correction. Radiology 1999, 213(2):521-525.
5. 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 1994, 35:164.
6. Boktor RR, Walker G, Stacey R, Gledhill S, Pitman AG: Reference range for intrapatient variability in blood-pool and liver SUV for 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2013, 54(5):677-682.
7. van den Hoff J, Oehme L, Schramm G, Maus J, Lougovski A, Petr J, Beuthien-Baumann B, Hofheinz F: 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 Res 2013, 3:77.
8. Beyer T, Czernin J, Freudenberg LS: Variations in clinical PET/CT operations: results of an international survey of active PET/CT users. J Nucl Med 2011, 52(2):303-310.
9. Tahari AK, Wahl RL: Quantitative FDG PET/CT in the community: experience from interpretation of outside oncologic PET/CT exams in referred cancer patients. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2013. doi:10.1111/1754-9485.12140.
10. Thie JA, Hubner KF, Smith GT: Optimizing imaging time for improved performance in oncology PET studies. Mol Imaging Biol 2002, 4(3):238-244.
11. Beaulieu S, Kinahan P, Tseng J, Dunnwald LK, Schubert EK, Pham P, Lewellen B, Mankoff DA: SUV varies with time after injection in (18)F-FDG PET of breast cancer: characterization and method to adjust for time differences. J Nucl Med 2003, 44(7):1044-1050.
12. Patlak C, Blasberg R, Fenstermacher J: Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants from multiple-time uptake data. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1983, 3:1-7.
13. Patlak C, Blasberg R: Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants from multiple-time uptake dataGeneralizations. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1985, 5(4):584-590.
14. ABX: ROVER: ROI visualization, evaluation and image registration. Radeberg: ABX; 2008. [http://www.abx.de/rover]
15. 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.
16. R Development Core Team: R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2011.
17. Boellaard R, O'Doherty MJ, Weber WA, Mottaghy FM, Lonsdale MN, Stroobants SG, Oyen WJG, Kotzerke J, Hoekstra OS, Pruim J, Marsden PK, Tatsch K, Hoekstra CJ, Visser EP, Arends B, Verzijlbergen FJ, Zijlstra JM, Comans EFI, Lammertsma AA, Paans AM, Willemsen AT, Beyer T, Bockisch A, Schaefer-Prokop C, Delbeke D, Baum RP, Chiti A, Krause BJ: FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0. EurJ Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010, 37:181-200. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19915839
18. Wahl R, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge M: From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med 2009, 50(Suppl 1):122S-150S.
19. Vriens D, de Geus-Oei LF, Oyen WJ, Visser EP: A curve-fitting approach to estimate the arterial plasma input function for the assessment of glucose metabolic rate and response to treatment. J Nucl Med 2009, 50(12):1933-1939.