Repeatability of metabolically active tumor volume measurements with FDG PET/ CT in Advanced gastrointestinal malignancies: A multicenter study

Radiology

Volumn 273, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 539-548

  Frings, Virginie ^a   Van Velden, Floris H P ^a   Velasquez, Linda M ^b   Hayes, Wendy ^b   De Van Ven, Peter M ^a   Hoekstra, Otto S ^a   Boellaard, Ronald ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b BRISTOL MYERS SQUIBB   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT;

ADULT; ADVANCED CANCER; AGED; ARTICLE; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; DIGESTIVE SYSTEM CANCER; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; LIVER METASTASIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEASUREMENT REPEATABILITY; MULTICENTER STUDY; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; REIMBURSEMENT; TEST RETEST RELIABILITY; TUMOR LOCALIZATION; TUMOR VOLUME; CANADA; CLINICAL TRIAL; DIAGNOSTIC USE; GASTROINTESTINAL NEOPLASMS; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; PATHOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY; SCINTISCANNING; UNITED STATES;

CANADA; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; GASTROINTESTINAL NEOPLASMS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84910046071     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.14132807     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Truong MT, Viswanathan C, Erasmus JJ. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography in lung cancer staging, prognosis, and assessment of therapeutic response. J Thorac Imaging 2011;26(2):132-146.
2. Fletcher JW, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP, et al. Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med 2008;49(3):480-508.
3. Hoekstra CJ, Paglianiti I, Hoekstra OS, et al. Monitoring response to therapy in cancer using [18F]-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose and positron emission tomography: An overview of different analytical methods. Eur J Nucl Med 2000;27(6):731-743.
4. 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.
5. Skougaard K, Nielsen D, Jensen BV, Hendel HW. Comparison of EORTC criteria and PERCIST for PET/CT response evaluation of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with irinotecan and cetuximab. J Nucl Med 2013;54(7):1026-1031.
6. Yanagawa M, Tatsumi M, Miyata H, et al. Evaluation of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for esophageal cancer: PET response criteria in solid tumors versus response evaluation criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med 2012;53(6):872-880.
7. Ziai D, Wagner T, El Badaoui A, et al. Therapy response evaluation with FDG-PET/CT in small cell lung cancer: A prognostic and comparison study of the PERCIST and EORTC criteria. Cancer Imaging 2013;13: 73-80.
8. Larson SM, Erdi Y, Akhurst T, et al. Tumor treatment response based on visual and quantitative changes in global tumor glycolysis using PET-FDG imaging: The visual response score and the change in total lesion glycolysis. Clin Positron Imaging 1999;2(3):159-171.
9. Cheebsumon P, van Velden FH, Yaqub M, et al. Effects of image characteristics on performance of tumor delineation methods: A testretest assessment. J Nucl Med 2011;52(10): 1550-1558.
10. Frings V, de Langen AJ, Smit EF, et al. Repeatability of metabolically active volume measurements with 18F-FDG and 18F-FLT PET in non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2010;51(12):1870-1877.
11. Chung HH, Kwon HW, Kang KW, et al. Prognostic value of preoperative metabolic tumor volume and total lesion glycolysis in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2012;19(6):1966-1972.
12. Abd El-Hafez YG, Moustafa HM, Khalil HF, Liao CT, Yen TC. Total lesion glycolysis: A possible new prognostic parameter in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma. Oral Oncol 2013;49(3):261-268.
13. Zhang H, Wroblewski K, Liao S, et al. Prognostic value of metabolic tumor burden from (18)F-FDG PET in surgical patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. Acad Radiol 2013; 20(1):32-40.
14. Garrett CR, Siu LL, El-Khoueiry A, et al. Phase I dose-escalation study to determine the safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of brivanib alaninate in combination with full-dose cetuximab in patients with advanced gastrointestinal malignancies who have failed prior therapy. Br J Cancer 2011;105(1):44-52.
15. Velasquez LM, Boellaard R, Kollia G, et al. Repeatability of 18F-FDG PET in a multicenter phase I study of patients with advanced gastrointestinal malignancies. J Nucl Med 2009;50(10):1646-1654.
16. Frings V, de Langen AJ, Yaqub M, et al. Methodological considerations in quantification of 39-deoxy-39-[18F]fluorothymidine uptake measured with positron emission tomography in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Mol Imaging Biol 2014;16(1):136-145.
17. van Dalen JA, Hoffmann AL, Dicken V, et al. A novel iterative method for lesion delineation and volumetric quantification with FDG PET. Nucl Med Commun 2007;28(6): 485-493.
18. Geets X, Lee JA, Bol A, Lonneux M, Gregoire V. A gradient-based method for segmenting FDG-PET images: methodology and validation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007;34(9):1427-1438.
19. Cheebsumon P, Boellaard R, de Ruysscher D, et al. Assessment of tumour size in PET/CT lung cancer studies: PET- And CT-based methods compared to pathology. EJNMMI Res 2012;2(1):56. doi:10.1186/2191-219X-2-56. Published October 3, 2012. Accessed 2014.
20. Bland JM, Altman DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res 1999;8(2):135-160.
21. Dirisamer A, Halpern BS, Schima W, et al. Dual-time-point FDG-PET/CT for the detection of hepatic metastases. Mol Imaging Biol 2008;10(6):335-340.
22. Heijmen L, de Geus-Oei LF, de Wilt JH, et al. Reproducibility of functional volume and activity concentration in 18F-FDG PET/CT of liver metastases in colorectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2012;39(12):1858-1867.
23. Boellaard R, O'Doherty MJ, Weber WA, 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(1):181-200.
24. Beaulieu S, Kinahan P, Tseng J, et al. SUV varies with time after injection in (18)FFDG PET of breast cancer: characterization and method to adjust for time differences. J Nucl Med 2003;44(7):1044-1050.
25. Boellaard R, Oyen WJ, Hoekstra CJ, 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(12):2320-2333.
26. Geramifar P, Zafarghandi MS, Ghafarian P, Rahmim A, Ay MR. Respiratory-induced errors in tumor quantification and delineation in CT attenuation-corrected PET images: effects of tumor size, tumor location, and respiratory trace- A simulation study using the 4D XCAT phantom. Mol Imaging Biol 2013;15(6):655-665.
27. Liu C, Alessio AM, Kinahan PE. Respiratory motion correction for quantitative PET/CT using all detected events with internalexternal motion correlation. Med Phys 2011; 38(5):2715-2723.
28. Didierlaurent D, Ribes S, Caselles O, et al. A new respiratory gating device to improve 4D PET/CT. Med Phys 2013;40(3):032501. doi:10.1118/1.4789487.Published March 2013. Accessed 2014.
29. Teo BK, Saboury B, Munbodh R, et al. The effect of breathing irregularities on quantitative accuracy of respiratory gated PET/CT. Med Phys 2012;39(12):7390-7397.
30. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92(3):205-216.
31. Maffione AM, Ferretti A, Grassetto G, et al. Fifteen different 18F-FDG PET/CT qualitative and quantitative parameters investigated as pathological response predictors of locally advanced rectal cancer treated by neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013;40(6):853-864.
32. Moon SH, Cho SH, Park LC, et al. Metabolic response evaluated by 18F-FDG PET/CT as a potential screening tool in identifying a subgroup of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer for immediate maintenance therapy after first-line chemotherapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013;40(7):1005-1013.
33. Graham MM, Badawi RD, Wahl RL. Variations in PET/CT methodology for oncologic imaging at U.S. academic medical centers: An imaging response assessment team survey. J Nucl Med 2011;52(2):311-317.