Skip to main content
Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 7/2013

01.07.2013 | Editorial Commentary

Optimisation and harmonisation: two sides of the same coin?

verfasst von: Ronald Boellaard

Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Ausgabe 7/2013

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Excerpt

18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) examinations are executed for several oncological applications [1]. In most cases PET/CT studies are performed with a diagnostic intent, often interpreted using visual inspection of the images. The primary task of the observer is e.g. to identify unknown primary tumours, lymph node involvement and the assessment of distant metastasis. It has been shown that FDG PET/CT is an important tool for either up or down staging of lung cancer patients with a direct impact on patient management [2]. The uptake of FDG can be used as a prognostic factor both in the clinical setting and in trials [3]. In addition to diagnosis and staging, FDG PET/CT is used to measure treatment response. Here residual FDG uptake or changes in uptake during or after treatment are used as predictive factors [46]. To this end, criteria to measure FDG uptake changes and/or metabolic response have been proposed [7, 8]. Finally, PET/CT studies performed at follow-up are used to assess presence or absence of recurrence of disease. Apart from the various applications of FDG PET/CT listed above, there are many other utilities of FDG PET/CT. For example, it can be used for radiation oncology purposes [912], e.g. by identifying areas with high metabolic activity that may require a boost of radiation to improve treatment outcome. …
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Fletcher JW, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP, Siegel BA, Lowe VJ, Lyman GH, et al. Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med 2008;49(3):480–508.PubMedCrossRef Fletcher JW, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP, Siegel BA, Lowe VJ, Lyman GH, et al. Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med 2008;49(3):480–508.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Czernin J, len-Auerbach M, Schelbert HR. Improvements in cancer staging with PET/CT: literature-based evidence as of September 2006. J Nucl Med 2007;48 Suppl 1:78S–88. Czernin J, len-Auerbach M, Schelbert HR. Improvements in cancer staging with PET/CT: literature-based evidence as of September 2006. J Nucl Med 2007;48 Suppl 1:78S–88.
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Geus-Oei LF, van der Heijden HF, Corstens FH, Oyen WJ. Predictive and prognostic value of FDG-PET in nonsmall-cell lung cancer: a systematic review. Cancer 2007;110(8):1654–64.PubMedCrossRef Geus-Oei LF, van der Heijden HF, Corstens FH, Oyen WJ. Predictive and prognostic value of FDG-PET in nonsmall-cell lung cancer: a systematic review. Cancer 2007;110(8):1654–64.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Kobe C, Scheffler M, Holstein A, Zander T, Nogoya L, Lammertsma AA, et al. Predictive value of early and late residual 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose and 18F-fluorothymidine uptake using different SUV measurements in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer treated with erlotinib. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2012;39(7):1117–27.PubMedCrossRef Kobe C, Scheffler M, Holstein A, Zander T, Nogoya L, Lammertsma AA, et al. Predictive value of early and late residual 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose and 18F-fluorothymidine uptake using different SUV measurements in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer treated with erlotinib. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2012;39(7):1117–27.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Weber WA. PET for response assessment in oncology: radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Br J Radiol 2005;Suppl 28:42–9.CrossRef Weber WA. PET for response assessment in oncology: radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Br J Radiol 2005;Suppl 28:42–9.CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Zander T, Scheffler M, Nogova L, Kobe C, Engel-Riedel W, Hellmich M, et al. Early prediction of nonprogression in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treated with erlotinib by using [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose and [(18)F]fluorothymidine positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol 2011;29(13):1701–8.PubMedCrossRef Zander T, Scheffler M, Nogova L, Kobe C, Engel-Riedel W, Hellmich M, et al. Early prediction of nonprogression in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treated with erlotinib by using [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose and [(18)F]fluorothymidine positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol 2011;29(13):1701–8.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat 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–50. 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–50.
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Young H, Baum R, Cremerius U, Herholz K, Hoekstra O, Lammertsma AA, et al. Measurement of clinical and subclinical tumour response using [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography: review and 1999 EORTC recommendations. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) PET Study Group. Eur J Cancer 1999;35(13):1773–82.PubMedCrossRef Young H, Baum R, Cremerius U, Herholz K, Hoekstra O, Lammertsma AA, et al. Measurement of clinical and subclinical tumour response using [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography: review and 1999 EORTC recommendations. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) PET Study Group. Eur J Cancer 1999;35(13):1773–82.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Chiti A, Kirienko M, Grégoire V. Clinical use of PET-CT data for radiotherapy planning: what are we looking for? Radiother Oncol 2010;96(3):277–9.PubMedCrossRef Chiti A, Kirienko M, Grégoire V. Clinical use of PET-CT data for radiotherapy planning: what are we looking for? Radiother Oncol 2010;96(3):277–9.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Gregoire V, Chiti A. PET in radiotherapy planning: particularly exquisite test or pending and experimental tool? Radiother Oncol 2010;96(3):275–6.PubMedCrossRef Gregoire V, Chiti A. PET in radiotherapy planning: particularly exquisite test or pending and experimental tool? Radiother Oncol 2010;96(3):275–6.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Roels S, Slagmolen P, Nuyts J, Lee JA, Loeckcx D, Maes F, et al. Biological image-guided radiotherapy in rectal cancer: challenges and pitfalls. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009;75:782–90.PubMedCrossRef Roels S, Slagmolen P, Nuyts J, Lee JA, Loeckcx D, Maes F, et al. Biological image-guided radiotherapy in rectal cancer: challenges and pitfalls. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009;75:782–90.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Thorwarth D, Schaefer A. Functional target volume delineation for radiation therapy on the basis of positron emission tomography and the correlation with histopathology. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010;54(5):490–9.PubMed Thorwarth D, Schaefer A. Functional target volume delineation for radiation therapy on the basis of positron emission tomography and the correlation with histopathology. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010;54(5):490–9.PubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Weber WA. Chaperoning drug development with PET. J Nucl Med 2006;47(5):735–7.PubMed Weber WA. Chaperoning drug development with PET. J Nucl Med 2006;47(5):735–7.PubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Karantanis D, Kalkanis D, Allen-Auerbach M, Bogsrud TV, Subramaniam RM, Danielson A, et al. Oncologic 18F-FDG PET/CT: referring physicians’ point of view. J Nucl Med 2012;53(10):1499–505.PubMedCrossRef Karantanis D, Kalkanis D, Allen-Auerbach M, Bogsrud TV, Subramaniam RM, Danielson A, et al. Oncologic 18F-FDG PET/CT: referring physicians’ point of view. J Nucl Med 2012;53(10):1499–505.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Weber WA. Positron emission tomography as an imaging biomarker. J Clin Oncol 2006;24(20):3282–92.PubMedCrossRef Weber WA. Positron emission tomography as an imaging biomarker. J Clin Oncol 2006;24(20):3282–92.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Andersen FL, Klausen TL, Loft A, Beyer T, Holm S. Clinical evaluation of PET image reconstruction using a spatial resolution model. Eur J Radiol 2013;82(5):862–9.PubMedCrossRef Andersen FL, Klausen TL, Loft A, Beyer T, Holm S. Clinical evaluation of PET image reconstruction using a spatial resolution model. Eur J Radiol 2013;82(5):862–9.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Lasnon C, Hicks RJ, Beauregard JM, Milner A, Paciencia M, Guizard AV, et al. Impact of point spread function reconstruction on thoracic lymph node staging with 18F-FDG PET/CT in non-small cell lung cancer. Clin Nucl Med 2012;37(10):971–6.PubMedCrossRef Lasnon C, Hicks RJ, Beauregard JM, Milner A, Paciencia M, Guizard AV, et al. Impact of point spread function reconstruction on thoracic lymph node staging with 18F-FDG PET/CT in non-small cell lung cancer. Clin Nucl Med 2012;37(10):971–6.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Boellaard R, O’Doherty MJ, Weber WA, Mottaghy FM, Lonsdale MN, Stroobants SG, 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.PubMedCrossRef Boellaard R, O’Doherty MJ, Weber WA, Mottaghy FM, Lonsdale MN, Stroobants SG, 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.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Boellaard R. Need for standardization of 18F-FDG PET/CT for treatment response assessments. J Nucl Med 2011;52 Suppl 2:93S–100. Boellaard R. Need for standardization of 18F-FDG PET/CT for treatment response assessments. J Nucl Med 2011;52 Suppl 2:93S–100.
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Boellaard R. Standards for PET image acquisition and quantitative data analysis. J Nucl Med 2009;50 Suppl 1:11S–20. Boellaard R. Standards for PET image acquisition and quantitative data analysis. J Nucl Med 2009;50 Suppl 1:11S–20.
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Beyer T, Czernin J, Freudenberg LS. Variations in clinical PET/CT operations: results of an international survey of active PET/CT users. J Nucl Med 2011;52:303–10.PubMedCrossRef Beyer T, Czernin J, Freudenberg LS. Variations in clinical PET/CT operations: results of an international survey of active PET/CT users. J Nucl Med 2011;52:303–10.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Lasnon C, Desmonts C, Quak E, Gervais R, Do P, Dubos-Arvis C, et al. Harmonizing SUVs in multicentre trials when using different generation PET systems: prospective validation in non-small cell lung cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013. doi:10.1007/s00259-013-2391-1.PubMed Lasnon C, Desmonts C, Quak E, Gervais R, Do P, Dubos-Arvis C, et al. Harmonizing SUVs in multicentre trials when using different generation PET systems: prospective validation in non-small cell lung cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013. doi:10.​1007/​s00259-013-2391-1.PubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Cheebsumon P, Yaqub M, van Velden FH, Hoekstra OS, Lammertsma AA, Boellaard R. Impact of [(18)F]FDG PET imaging parameters on automatic tumour delineation: need for improved tumour delineation methodology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011;38(12):2136–44.PubMedCrossRef Cheebsumon P, Yaqub M, van Velden FH, Hoekstra OS, Lammertsma AA, Boellaard R. Impact of [(18)F]FDG PET imaging parameters on automatic tumour delineation: need for improved tumour delineation methodology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011;38(12):2136–44.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat 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(9):1519–27.PubMed 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(9):1519–27.PubMed
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Lodge MA, Chaudhry MA, Wahl RL. Noise considerations for PET quantification using maximum and peak standardized uptake value. J Nucl Med 2012;53(7):1041–7.PubMedCrossRef Lodge MA, Chaudhry MA, Wahl RL. Noise considerations for PET quantification using maximum and peak standardized uptake value. J Nucl Med 2012;53(7):1041–7.PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Optimisation and harmonisation: two sides of the same coin?
verfasst von
Ronald Boellaard
Publikationsdatum
01.07.2013
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Ausgabe 7/2013
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Elektronische ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-013-2440-9

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2013

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 7/2013 Zur Ausgabe