Reproducibility of 18F-FDG and 3′-Deoxy-3′-18F-Fluorothymidine PET Tumor Volume Measurements
Reproducibility of 18F-FDG and 3′-Deoxy-3′-18F-Fluorothymidine PET Tumor Volume Measurements
复制标题
DOI：
10.2967/jnumed.110.078501
复制
发表时间：
2010-09-01
影响因子：
9.3
通讯作者：
Visvikis, Dimitris
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hatt, Mathieu;Rest, Catherine Cheze-Le;Visvikis, Dimitris
本研究的目的是建立几个与体积相关的PET图像衍生指标的重复性和再现性极限，即肿瘤体积（TV），平均标准化摄取值，总糖酵解体积（TGV）和总增殖体积（TPV），相对于临床中常用的最大标准化摄取值（SUVmax）。方法：采用固定阈值法和自适应阈值法、模糊c均值法和模糊局部自适应贝叶斯法进行电视图像的划分。双基线F-18-FDG（17个病灶，14例食管癌患者）和3'-脱氧-3'- f -18-氟胸苷（F-18-FLT）（12个病灶，9例乳腺癌患者）PET扫描，在任何治疗前平均间隔4 d获得，用于重复性评估。对于相同的数据集，评估了每种方法的可重复性，并与人工圈定进行了比较。结果：与人工划分（5%-35%）相比，所有分割方法的可变性均小于5%，可以忽略不计。SUVmax重现性水平与之前报道的相似，F-18-FDG和F-18-FLT病变的平均百分比差异分别为1.8% +/- 16.7%和-0.9% +/- 14.9%。F-18-FDG和F-18-FLT图像的最佳TV、TGV和TPV再现极限分别为-21% ~ 31%和-30% ~ 37%，而最差再现极限分别为-90% ~ 73%和-68% ~ 52%。结论：不同分割算法估计TV、平均标准化摄取值、导出TGV和TPV的可重复性存在差异。观察到F-18-FDG和F-18-FLT扫描之间存在一些差异，主要是因为整体图像质量的差异。体积衍生图像指数的较小再现性限制与SUVmax相似，表明使用适当的描绘工具应该能够以可重复和可再现的方式确定PET图像中的肿瘤功能体积。
The objective of this study was to establish the repeatability and reproducibility limits of several volume-related PET image-derived indices-namely tumor volume (TV), mean standardized uptake value, total glycolytic volume (TGV), and total proliferative volume (TPV)-relative to those of maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), commonly used in clinical practice. Methods: Fixed and adaptive thresholding, fuzzy C-means, and fuzzy locally adaptive Bayesian methodology were considered for TV delineation. Double-baseline F-18-FDG (17 lesions, 14 esophageal cancer patients) and 3'-deoxy-3'-F-18-fluorothymidine (F-18-FLT) (12 lesions, 9 breast cancer patients) PET scans, acquired at a mean interval of 4 d and before any treatment, were used for reproducibility evaluation. The repeatability of each method was evaluated for the same datasets and compared with manual delineation. Results: A negligible variability of less than 5% was measured for all segmentation approaches in comparison to manual delineation (5%-35%). SUVmax reproducibility levels were similar to others previously reported, with a mean percentage difference of 1.8% +/- 16.7% and -0.9% +/- 14.9% for the F-18-FDG and F-18-FLT lesions, respectively. The best TV, TGV, and TPV reproducibility limits ranged from -21% to 31% and -30% to 37% for F-18-FDG and F-18-FLT images, respectively, whereas the worst reproducibility limits ranged from -90% to 73% and -68% to 52%, respectively. Conclusion: The reproducibility of estimating TV, mean standardized uptake value, and derived TGV and TPV was found to vary among segmentation algorithms. Some differences between F-18-FDG and F-18-FLT scans were observed, mainly because of differences in overall image quality. The smaller reproducibility limits for volume-derived image indices were similar to those for SUVmax, suggesting that the use of appropriate delineation tools should allow the determination of tumor functional volumes in PET images in a repeatable and reproducible fashion.