Metabolic impact of Partial Volume Correction of [18F]FDG PET-CT oncological studies on the assessment of tumor response to treatment

Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Volumn 58, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 413-423

  Stefano, A L ^a,b   Gallivanone, F ^a   Messa, C L ^a,b,c,d   Gilardi, M C L ^a,c,e   Castiglioni, I ^a  

^a CNR   (Italy)

^b HSR G Giglio   (Italy)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MILANO BICOCCA   (Italy)

^d SAN GERARDO HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^e SAN RAFFAELE HOSPITAL   (Italy)

Author keywords

Bone and bones; Neoplasm metastasis; Positron emission tomography

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BODY WEIGHT; BONE LESION; BREAST CANCER; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER SURGERY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MEASUREMENT; NEOPLASM; PARTIAL VOLUME CORRECTION; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY; TREATMENT RESPONSE; VOLUME; AGED; BONE TUMOR; BREAST TUMOR; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; DIAGNOSTIC USE; IMAGE QUALITY; METASTASIS; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; PROCEDURES; RADIOGRAPHY; SCINTISCANNING; SECONDARY;

AGED; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; BONE NEOPLASMS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; NEOPLASM METASTASIS; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84929875691     PISSN: 18244785     EISSN: 18271936     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Rigo P, Paulus P, Kaschten BJ, Hustinx R, Bury T, Jerusalem G et al. Oncological applications of positron emission tomography with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose. Eur J Nucl Med 1996;23:1641-74.
2. Poeppel TO, Krause BJ, Heusner TA, Boy C, Bockisch A, Antoch G. PET/CT for the staging and follow-up of patients with malignancies. Eur J Radiol 2009;70:382-92.
3. Kaira K, Murakami H, Miura S, Kaira R, Akamatsu H, Kimura M et al. (18) F-FDG uptake on PET helps predict outcome and response after treatment in unresectable thymic epithelial tumors. Ann Nucl Med 2011;25:247-53.
4. Morris PG, Lynch C, Feeney JN, Patil S, Howard J, Larson SM et al. Integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography may render bone scintigraphy unnecessary to investigate suspected metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:3154-9.
5. Choi H, Charnsangavej C, Faria SC, Macapinlac HA, Burgess MA, Patel SR et al. Correlation of computed tomography and positron emission tomography in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor treated at a single institution with imatinib mesylate: proposal of new computed tomography response criteria. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:1753-9
6. Jaffe CC. Response Assessment in Clinical Trials: Implications for Sarcoma Clinical Trial Design. The Oncologist 2008;13(Pt 2):14-18.
7. Michaelis LC, Ratain MJ. Measuring response in a post-RECIST world: from black and white to shades of grey. Nat Rev Cancer 2006;6:409-14.
8. 18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography: review and 1999 EORTC recommendations. Eur. J. Canc 1999;35:1773-82.
9. Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge MA. From RECIST to PER-CIST: Evolving Considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med 2009;50(Pt 1):122S-150S.
10. Costelloe CM, Chuang HH, Madewell JE, Ueno NT. Cancer Response Criteria and Bone Metastases: RECIST 1.1, MDA and PER-CIST. J Cancer 2010;1:80-92.
11. Kidd EA, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW. The standardized uptake value for F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose is a sensitive predictive biomarker for cervical cancer treatment response and survival. Cancer 2007;110:1738-44.
12. 18F]FDG PET as a candidate for "qualified biomarker": functional assessment of treatment response in oncology. J Nucl Med 2006;47:901-3.
13. Nguyen NC, Kaushik A, Wolverson MK, Osman MM. Is there a common SUV threshold in oncological FDG PET/CT, at least for some common indications? A retrospective study. Acta Oncol 2011;50:670-7.
14. Wahl RL, Zasadny K, Helvie M, Hutchins GD, Weber B, Cody R. Metabolic monitoring of breast cancer chemohormonotherapy using positron emission tomography: initial evaluation. J Clin Oncol 1993;11:2101-11.
15. Tateishi U, Gamez C, Dawood S, Yeung HW, Cristofanilli M, Macapinlac HA. Bone metastases in patients with metastatic breast cancer: morphologic and metabolic monitoring of response to systemic therapy with integrated PET/CT. Radiology 2008;247:189-96.
16. Boellaard R, Krak NC, Hoekstra OS, Lammertsma AA. Effects of noise, image resolution, and ROI definition on the accuracy of standard uptake values: a simulation study. J Nucl Med 2004;45:1519-27.
17. Tylski P, Stute S, Grotus N, Doyeux K, Hapdey S, Gardin I, Vanderlinden B, Buvat I. Comparative assessment of methods for estimating tumor volume and standardized uptake value in (18) F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2010;51(2):268-76.
18. Krak NC, Boellaard R, Hoekstra OS, Twisk JWR, 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;32:294-301.
19. Soret M, Bacharach SL, Buvat I. Partial-volume effect in PET tumor imaging. J Nucl Med 2007;48:932-45.
20. Kessler RM, Ellis JR, Eden M. Analysis of emission tomographic scan data: limitations imposed by resolution and background. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1984;8:514-22.
21. Gallivanone F, Stefano A, Canevari C, Gianolli L, Messa C, Gilardi MC et al. PVE correction in PET-CT whole-body oncological studies from PVE-affected images. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2011;58:736-47.
22. Rousset OG, Ma Y, Evans AC. Correction for partial volume effects in PET: principle and validation. J Nucl Med 1998;39:904-11.
23. Chen CH, Muzic RF, Nelson AD, Adler LP. Simultaneous recovery of size and radioactivity concentration of small spheroids with PET data. J Nucl Med 1999;40:118-30.
24. Boussion N, Hatt M, Lamare F, Bizais Y, Turzo A, Cheze-Le Rest C et al. A multiresolution image based approach for correction of partial volume effects in emission tomography. Phys Med Biol 2006;51:1857-76.
25. Hoetjes N, Van Velden F, Hoekstra O, Hoekstra C, Krak N, Lammertsma A and Boellaard R. Partial volume correction strategies for quantitative FDG PET in oncology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010;37:1679-87.
26. Teo BK, Seo Y, Bacharach SL, Carrasquillo JA, Libutti SK, Shukla H et al. Partial-volume correction in PET: validation of an iterative postreconstruction method with phantom and patient data. J Nucl Med 2007;48:802-10.
27. Tohka J, Reilhac A. Deconvolution-based partial volume correction in raclopride-PET and Monte Carlo comparison to MR-based method. Neuroimage 2008;39:1570-84.
28. Rizzo G, Castiglioni I, Russo G, Tana MG, Dell'Acqua F, Gilardi MC et al. Using deconvolution to improve PET spatial resolution in OSEM iterative reconstruction. Method Inform Med 2007;46:231-5.
29. Hoffman EJ, Huang SC, Phelps ME. Quantitation in positron emission computer tomography: effect of object size. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1979;3:299-308.
30. Srinivas SM, Dhurairaj T, Basu S, Bural G, Surti S, Alavi A. A recovery coefficient method for partial volume correction of PET images. Ann Nucl Med 2009;23:341-8.
31. Bettinardi V, Mancosu P, Danna M, Giovacchini G, Landoni C, Picchio M et al. Two-dimensional vs three-dimensional imaging in whole body oncologic positron emission tomography/computed tomography: a Discovery-STE phantom and patient study. QJNucl Med Mol Imaging 2007;51:214-23.
32. I. Castiglioni, F. Gallivanone, and A. Stefano, TOUCH SUV, SIAE registration number 007449 - D006667, 2009.
33. Graham MM, Peterson LM, Hayward RM. Comparison of simplified quantitative analyses of FDG uptake. Nucl Med Biol 2000;27:647-55.
34. Hur J, Yoon CS, Ryu YH, Yun MJ, Suh JS. Accuracy of fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography for diagnosis of single bone metastasis: comparison with bone scintigraphy. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2007;31:812-9.
35. Shin DS, Shon OJ, Han DS, Choi JH, Chun KA, Cho IH. The clinical efficacy of (18) F-FDG-PET/CT in benign and malignant musculoskeletal tumors. Ann Nucl Med 2008;22:603-9.
36. Gwak HS, Youn SM, Chang U, Lee DH, Cheon GJ, Rhee CH et al. Usefulness of (18) F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET for radiosurgery planning and response monitoring in patients with recurrent spinal metastasis. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2006;49:127-34.
37. Bettinardi V, Picchio M, Di Muzio N, Gianolli L, Gilardi MC, Messa C. Detection and compensation of organ/lesion motion using 4D-PET/CT respiratory gated acquisition techniques. Radiother Oncol 2010;96:311-6.
38. Fox JJ, Autran-Blanc E, Morris MJ, Gavane S, Nehmeh S, Van Nuffel A et al. Practical approach for comparative analysis of multi-lesion molecular imaging using a semi-automated program for PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2011;52:1727-32.
39. 18F-FDG PET in staging and early prediction of response to therapy of recurrent gastrointestinal stromal tumors. J Nucl Med 2004;45:17-21.
40. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L 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;92:205-16.