Repeatability of 18F-FDG PET/CT in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Prospective assessment in 2 multicenter trials

Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Volumn 56, Issue 8, 2015, Pages 1137-1143

  Weber, Wolfgang A ^a   Gatsonis, Constantine A ^b   David Mozley, P ^c   Hanna, Lucy G ^b   Shields, Anthony F ^d   Aberle, Denise R ^e   Govindan, Ramaswamy ^f   Torigian, Drew A ^g   Karp, Joel S ^g   Michael Yu, Jian Q ^h   Subramaniam, Rathan M ⁱ   Halvorsen, Robert A ^j   Siegel, Barry A ^k  

^a MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^b BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c MERCK RESEARCH LABORATORIES   (United States)

^d WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^f Washington University in St Louis School of Medicine   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^h FOX CHASE CANCER CENTER   (United States)

ⁱ JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^j VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^k WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

FDG PET CT; Quantification; Repeatability; Reproducibility

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT;

ADULT; ADVANCED CANCER; ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; CANCER STAGING; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIGESTIVE SYSTEM CANCER; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MULTICENTER STUDY; NON SMALL CELL LUNG CANCER; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SOLID TUMOR; TEST RETEST RELIABILITY; AGED; CLINICAL TRIAL; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; IMAGE PROCESSING; LUNG TUMOR; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; PROCEDURES; REPRODUCIBILITY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; X-RAY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY;

AGED; CARCINOMA, NON-SMALL-CELL LUNG; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84938849601     PISSN: 01615505     EISSN: 2159662X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.114.147728     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin. 2014;64:9-29.
2. Schiller JH, Harrington D, Belani CP, et al. Comparison of four chemotherapy regimens for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:92-98.
3. Mok TS, Wu YL, Thongprasert S, et al. Gefitinib or carboplatin-paclitaxel in pulmonary adenocarcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:947-957.
4. Skoura E, Datseris IE, Platis I, Oikonomopoulos G, Syrigos KN. Role of positron emission tomography in the early prediction of response to chemotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. Clin Lung Cancer. 2012;13:181-187.
5. Kelloff GJ, Sigman CC. Cancer biomarkers: selecting the right drug for the right patient. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2012;11:201-214.
6. 18F-fluorothymidine PET tumor volume measurements. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:1368-1376.
7. 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:1304-1309.
8. Kumar V, Nath K, Berman CG, et al. Variance of SUVs for FDG-PET/CT is greater in clinical practice than under ideal study settings. Clin Nucl Med. 2013;38:175-182.
9. Minn H, Zasadny KR, Quint LE, Wahl RL. Lung cancer: reproducibility of quantitative measurements for evaluating 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose uptake at PET. Radiology. 1995;196:167-173.
10. 18F-FDG PET in malignant tumors. J Nucl Med. 2008;49: 1804-1808.
11. Rockall AG, Avril N, Lam R, et al. Repeatability of quantitative FDG-PET/CT and contrast-enhanced CT in recurrent ovarian carcinoma: test-retest measurements for tumor FDG uptake, diameter, and volume. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20: 2751-2760.
12. Weber WA, Ziegler SI, Thodtmann R, Hanauske AR, Schwaiger M. Reproduc-ibility of metabolic measurements in malignant tumors using FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:1771-1777.
13. Kamibayashi T, Tsuchida T, Demura Y, et al. Reproducibility of semi-quantitative parameters in FDG-PET using two different PET scanners: influence of attenuation correction method and examination interval. Mol Imaging Biol. 2008;10: 162-166.
14. 18F-FDG PET in a multicenter phase I study of patients with advanced gastrointestinal malignancies. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:1646-1654.
15. Greene F, Balch C, Haller D, et al., ed. American Joint Committee on Cancer. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 6th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Raven; 2002.
16. 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;92:205-216.
17. 18F-FDG PET as an indicator of therapeutic response in patients in National Cancer Institute Trials. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1059-1066.
18. 18F-FDG uptake measurements in tumors: a metaanalysis. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:701-708.
19. 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.
20. Bland JM, Altman DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res. 1999;8:135-160.
21. Tahari AK, Chien D, Azadi JR, Wahl RL. Optimum lean body formulation for correction of standardized uptake value in PET imaging. J Nucl Med. 2014;55: 1481-1484.
22. Nehmeh SA, Erdi YE, Ling CC, et al. Effect of respiratory gating on quantifying PET images of lung cancer. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:876-881.
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;37:181-200.
24. 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;45:1519-1527.
25. Lodge MA, Chaudhry MA, Wahl RL. Noise considerations for PET quantification using maximum and peak standardized uptake value. J Nucl Med. 2012;53: 1041-1047.
26. Doot RK, Scheuermann JS, Christian PE, Karp JS, Kinahan PE. Instrumentation factors affecting variance and bias of quantifying tracer uptake with PET/CT. Med Phys. 2010;37:6035-6046.
27. Reck M, Heigener DF, Mok T, Soria JC, Rabe KF. Management of non-small-cell lung cancer: recent developments. Lancet. 2013;382:709-719.