[en] Quantitative measurement of tracer uptake in a tumour can be influenced by a number of factors, including the method of defining regions of interest (ROIs) and the reconstruction parameters used. The main purpose of this study was to determine the effects of different ROI methods on quantitative outcome, using two reconstruction methods and the standard uptake value (SUV) as a simple quantitative measure of FDG uptake. Four commonly used methods of ROI definition (manual placement, fixed dimensions, threshold based and maximum pixel value) were used to calculate SUV (SUV_[MAN], SUV_15mm, SUV₅₀, SUV₇₅ and SUV_max, respectively) and to generate ''metabolic'' tumour volumes. Test-retest reproducibility of SUVs and of ''metabolic'' tumour volumes and the applicability of ROI methods during chemotherapy were assessed. In addition, SUVs calculated on ordered subsets expectation maximisation (OSEM) and filtered back-projection (FBP) images were compared. ROI definition had a direct effect on quantitative outcome. On average, SUV_[MAN], SUV_15mm, SUV₅₀ and SUV₇₅, were respectively 48%, 27%, 34% and 15% lower than SUV_max when calculated on OSEM images. No statistically significant differences were found between SUVs calculated on OSEM and FBP reconstructed images. Highest reproducibility was found for SUV_15mm and SUV_[MAN] (ICC 0.95 and 0.94, respectively) and for ''metabolic'' volumes measured with the manual and 50% threshold ROIs (ICC 0.99 for both). Manual, 75% threshold and maximum pixel ROIs could be used throughout therapy, regardless of changes in tumour uptake or geometry. SUVs showed the same trend in relative change in FDG uptake after chemotherapy, irrespective of the ROI method used. The method of ROI definition has a direct influence on quantitative outcome. In terms of simplicity, user-independence, reproducibility and general applicability the threshold-based and fixed dimension methods are the best ROI methods. Threshold methods are in addition relatively independent of changes in size and geometry, however, and may therefore be more suitable for response monitoring purposes. (orig.)

[en] FDG PET is a promising technique for monitoring tumour response early during anticancer therapy. Progress, however, has been limited owing to the multitude of methods currently in use. Here, the most promising techniques for multi-centre trials are discussed briefly, with emphasis on the need for standardisation. In addition, an approach is presented for response monitoring studies using newly developed drugs. This approach makes use of a large database of response monitoring studies, which defines the relationship between simplified clinical methods and full quantitative analysis for classic cytotoxic drugs. For a new drug, first a pilot study is performed to assess whether it affects this relationship. Based on this pilot, it is decided whether or not a simplified clinical method can be used in further studies. (orig.)

[en] Quantitative accuracy of positron emission tomography (PET) is affected by partial volume effects resulting in increased underestimation of the standardized uptake value (SUV) with decreasing tumour volume. The purpose of the present study was to assess accuracy and precision of different partial volume correction (PVC) methods. Three methods for PVC were evaluated: (1) inclusion of the point spread function (PSF) within the reconstruction, (2) iterative deconvolution of PET images and (3) calculation of spill-in and spill-out factors based on tumour masks. Simulations were based on a mathematical phantom with tumours of different sizes and shapes. Phantom experiments were performed in 2-D mode using the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) NU2 image quality phantom containing six differently sized spheres. Clinical studies (2-D mode) included a test-retest study consisting of 10 patients with stage IIIB and IV non-small cell lung cancer and a response monitoring study consisting of 15 female breast cancer patients. In all studies tumour or sphere volumes of interest (VOI) were generated using VOI based on adaptive relative thresholds. Simulations and experiments provided similar results. All methods were able to accurately recover true SUV within 10% for spheres equal to and larger than 1 ml. Reconstruction-based recovery, however, provided up to twofold better precision than image-based methods. Clinical studies showed that PVC increased SUV by 5-80% depending on tumour size. Test-retest variability slightly worsened from 9.8 ± 6.5 without to 10.8 ± 7.9% with PVC. Finally, PVC resulted in slightly smaller SUV responses, i.e. from -30.5% without to -26.3% with PVC after the first cycle of treatment (p < 0.01). PVC improves accuracy of SUV without decreasing (clinical) test-retest variability significantly and it has a small, but significant effect on observed tumour responses. Reconstruction-based PVC outperforms image-based methods, but requires dedicated reconstruction software. Image-based methods are good alternatives because of their ease of implementation and their similar performance in clinical studies. (orig.)

[en] Imaging with positron emission tomography (PET) using ¹⁸F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) plays an increasingly important role for response assessment in oncology. Several methods for quantifying FDG PET results exist. The goal of this study was to analyse and compare various semi-quantitative measures for response assessment with full kinetic analysis, specifically in assessment of novel therapies. Baseline and response dynamic FDG studies from two different longitudinal studies (study A: seven subjects with lung cancer and study B: six subjects with gastrointestinal cancer) with targeted therapies were reviewed. Quantification of tumour uptake included full kinetic methods, i.e. nonlinear regression (NLR) and Patlak analyses, and simplified measures such as the simplified kinetic method (SKM) and standardized uptake value (SUV). An image-derived input function was used for NLR and Patlak analysis. There were 18 and 9 lesions defined for two response monitoring studies (A and B). In all cases there was excellent correlation between Patlak- and NLR-derived response (R ² > 0.96). Percentage changes seen with SUV were significantly different from those seen with Patlak for both studies (p < 0.05). After correcting SUV for plasma glucose, SUV and Patlak responses became similar for study A, but large differences remained for study B. Further analysis revealed that differences in responses amongst methods in study B were primarily due to changes in the arterial input functions. Use of simplified methods for assessment of drug efficacy or treatment response may provide different results than those seen with full kinetic analysis. (orig.)

[en] Several studies have shown the usefulness of positron emission tomography (PET) quantification using standardised uptake values (SUV) for diagnosis and staging, prognosis and response monitoring. Many factors affect SUV, such as patient preparation procedures, scan acquisition, image reconstruction and data analysis settings, and the variability in methodology across centres prohibits exchange of SUV data. Therefore, standardisation of 2-[¹⁸F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) PET whole body procedures is required in multi-centre trials. A protocol for standardisation of quantitative FDG whole body PET studies in the Netherlands (NL) was defined. This protocol is based on standardisation of: (1) patient preparation; (2) matching of scan statistics by prescribing dosage as function of patient weight, scan time per bed position, percentage of bed overlap and image acquisition mode (2D or 3D); (3) matching of image resolution by prescribing reconstruction settings for each type of scanner; (4) matching of data analysis procedure by defining volume of interest methods and SUV calculations and; (5) finally, a multi-centre QC procedure is defined using a 20-cm diameter phantom for verification of scanner calibration and the NEMA NU 2 2001 Image Quality phantom for verification of activity concentration recoveries (i.e., verification of image resolution and reconstruction convergence). This paper describes a protocol for standardization of quantitative FDG whole body multi-centre PET studies. The protocol was successfully implemented in the Netherlands and has been approved by the Netherlands Society of Nuclear Medicine. (orig.)

[en] The purpose of these guidelines is to assist physicians in recommending, performing, interpreting and reporting the results of FDG PET/CT for oncological imaging of adult patients. PET is a quantitative imaging technique and therefore requires a common quality control (QC)/quality assurance (QA) procedure to maintain the accuracy and precision of quantitation. Repeatability and reproducibility are two essential requirements for any quantitative measurement and/or imaging biomarker. Repeatability relates to the uncertainty in obtaining the same result in the same patient when he or she is examined more than once on the same system. However, imaging biomarkers should also have adequate reproducibility, i.e. the ability to yield the same result in the same patient when that patient is examined on different systems and at different imaging sites. Adequate repeatability and reproducibility are essential for the clinical management of patients and the use of FDG PET/CT within multicentre trials. A common standardised imaging procedure will help promote the appropriate use of FDG PET/CT imaging and increase the value of publications and, therefore, their contribution to evidence-based medicine. Moreover, consistency in numerical values between platforms and institutes that acquire the data will potentially enhance the role of semiquantitative and quantitative image interpretation. Precision and accuracy are additionally important as FDG PET/CT is used to evaluate tumour response as well as for diagnosis, prognosis and staging. Therefore both the previous and these new guidelines specifically aim to achieve standardised uptake value harmonisation in multicentre settings. (orig.)