Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 9/2010

Open Access 01-08-2010 | Original Article

Partial volume correction strategies for quantitative FDG PET in oncology

Authors: Nikie J. Hoetjes, Floris H. P. van Velden, Otto S. Hoekstra, Corneline J. Hoekstra, Nanda C. Krak, Adriaan A. Lammertsma, Ronald Boellaard

Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Issue 9/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

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.

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.

Results

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).

Conclusion

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.
Literature
1.
Hoekstra CJ, Paglianiti I, Hoekstra OS, Smit EF, Postmus PE, Teule GJ, et al. Monitoring response to therapy in cancer using [18F]-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose and positron emission tomography: an overview of different analytical methods. Eur J Nucl Med 2000;27(6):731–43.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Graham MM, Peterson LM, Hayward RM. Comparison of simplified quantitative analyses of FDG uptake. Nucl Med Biol 2000;27(7):647–55.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Lowe VJ, DeLong DM, Hoffman JM, Coleman RE. Optimum scanning protocol for FDG-PET evaluation of pulmonary malignancy. J Nucl Med 1995;36(5):883–7.PubMed
4.
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
5.
Soret M, Bacharach SL, Buvat I. Partial-volume effect in PET tumor imaging. J Nucl Med 2007;48(6):932–45.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Geworski L, Knoop BO, de Cabrejas ML, Knapp WH, Munz DL. Recovery correction for quantitation in emission tomography: a feasibility study. Eur J Nucl Med 2000;27(2):161–9.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Hoffman EJ, Huang SC, Phelps ME. Quantitation in positron emission computed tomography: 1. Effect of object size. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1979;3(3):299–308.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Aston JA, Cunningham VJ, Asselin MC, Hammers A, Evans AC, Gunn RN. Positron emission tomography partial volume correction: estimation and algorithms. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2002;22(8):1019–34.CrossRefPubMed
9.
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(7):1857–76.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Hickeson M, Yun M, Matthies A, Zhuang H, Adam LE, Lacorte L, et al. Use of a corrected standardized uptake value based on the lesion size on CT permits accurate characterization of lung nodules on FDG-PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29(12):1639–47.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Baete K, Nuyts J, Van Laere K, Van Paesschen W, Ceyssens S, De Ceuninck L, et al. Evaluation of anatomy based reconstruction for partial volume correction in brain FDG-PET. Neuroimage 2004;23(1):305–17.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Erlandsson K, Wong AT, van Heertum R, Mann JJ, Parsey RV. An improved method for voxel-based partial volume correction in PET and SPECT. Neuroimage 2006;31:T84.CrossRef
13.
Meltzer CC, Leal JP, Mayberg HS, Wagner Jr HN, Frost JJ. Correction of PET data for partial volume effects in human cerebral cortex by MR imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1990;14(4):561–70.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Müller-Gärtner HW, Links JM, Prince JL, Bryan RN, McVeigh E, Leal JP, et al. Measurement of radiotracer concentration in brain gray matter using positron emission tomography: MRI-based correction for partial volume effects. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1992;12(4):571–83.PubMed
15.
Frouin V, Comtat C, Reilhac A, Grégoire MC. Correction of partial-volume effect for PET striatal imaging: fast implementation and study of robustness. J Nucl Med 2002;43(12):1715–26.PubMed
16.
Rousset OG, Ma Y, Evans AC. Correction for partial volume effects in PET: principle and validation. J Nucl Med 1998;39(5):904–11.PubMed
17.
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(5):802–10.PubMed
18.
Jones DR, Parker Jr LA, Detterbeck FC, Egan TM. Inadequacy of computed tomography in assessing patients with esophageal carcinoma after induction chemoradiotherapy. Cancer 1999;85(5):1026–32.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Kitagawa Y, Nishizawa S, Sano K, Ogasawara T, Nakamura M, Sadato N, et al. Prospective comparison of 18F-FDG PET with conventional imaging modalities (MRI, CT, and 67Ga scintigraphy) in assessment of combined intraarterial chemotherapy and radiotherapy for head and neck carcinoma. J Nucl Med 2003;44(2):198–206.PubMed
20.
Pottgen C, Gauler T, Krbek T, Kuhl H, Stergar H, Gohlert A, et al. F-18-FDG-PET/CT-progress examinations in a prospective phase-III protocol—a successful selection instrument for definitive radiochemotherapy in patients with locally advanced NSCLC? Strahlenther Onkol 2006;182:111–2.
21.
Vesselle H, Schmidt RA, Pugsley JM, Li M, Kohlmyer SG, Vallieres E, et al. Lung cancer proliferation correlates with [F-18]fluorodeoxyglucose uptake by positron emission tomography. Clin Cancer Res 2000;6(10):3837–44.PubMed
22.
Brix G, Doll J, Bellemann ME, Trojan H, Haberkorn U, Schmidlin P, et al. Use of scanner characteristics in iterative image reconstruction for high-resolution positron emission tomography studies of small animals. Eur J Nucl Med 1997;24(7):779–86.PubMed
23.
Reader AJ, Julyan PJ, Williams H, Hastings DL, Zweit J. EM algorithm system modeling by image-space techniques for PET reconstruction. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2003;50(5):1392–7.CrossRef
24.
Mourik JE, Lubberink M, Klumpers UM, Comans EF, Lammertsma AA, Boellaard R. Partial volume corrected image derived input functions for dynamic PET brain studies: methodology and validation for [11C]flumazenil. Neuroimage 2008;39(3):1041–50.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Tohka J, Reilhac A. Deconvolution-based partial volume correction in Raclopride-PET and Monte Carlo comparison to MR-based method. Neuroimage 2008;39(4):1570–84.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Hudson HM, Larkin RS. Accelerated image reconstruction using ordered subsets of projection data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1994;13:601–9.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Brix G, Zaers J, Adam LE, Bellemann ME, Ostertag H, Trojan H, et al. Performance evaluation of a whole-body PET scanner using the NEMA protocol. National Electrical Manufacturers Association. J Nucl Med 1997;38(10):1614–23.PubMed
28.
Hoekstra CJ, Hoekstra OS, Stroobants SG, Smit EF, Lammertsma AA. A comparison of different analytical methods for response monitoring in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using FDG PET. J Nucl Med 1999;40(5):140P.
29.
Krak NC, Boellaard R, Hoekstra OS, Twisk JW, 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(3):294–301.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Westerterp M, Pruim J, Oyen W, Hoekstra O, Paans A, Visser E, et al. Quantification of FDG PET studies using standardised uptake values in multi-centre trials: effects of image reconstruction, resolution and ROI definition parameters. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007;34:392–404.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Erdi YE, Mawlawi O, Larson SM, Imbriaco M, Yeung H, Finn R, et al. Segmentation of lung lesion volume by adaptive positron emission tomography image thresholding. Cancer 1997;80(12 Suppl):2505–9.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Caldwell CB, Mah K, Ung YC, Danjoux CE, Balogh JM, Ganguli SN, et al. Observer variation in contouring gross tumor volume in patients with poorly defined non-small-cell lung tumors on CT: the impact of (18)FDG-hybrid PET fusion. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001;51(4):923–31.PubMed
33.
Nehmeh SA, Erdi YE, Ling CC, Rosenzweig KE, Squire OD, Braban LE, et al. Effect of respiratory gating on reducing lung motion artifacts in PET imaging of lung cancer. Med Phys 2002;29(3):366–71.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Remeijer P, Rasch C, Lebesque JV, van Herk M. A general methodology for three-dimensional analysis of variation in target volume delineation. Med Phys 1999;26(6):931–40.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Steenbakkers RJHM, Duppen JC, Fitton I, Deurloo KEI, Zijp L, Uitterhoeve ALJ, et al. Observer variation in target volume delineation of lung cancer related to radiation oncologist-computer interaction: a ‘Big Brother’ evaluation. Radiother Oncol 2005;77(2):182–90.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Lavely WC, Scarfone C, Cevikalp H, Li R, Byrne DW, Cmelak AJ, et al. Phantom validation of coregistration of PET and CT for image-guided radiotherapy. Med Phys 2004;31(5):1083–92.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Nömayr A, Römer W, Hothorn T, Pfahlberg A, Hornegger J, Bautz W, et al. Anatomical accuracy of lesion localization. Retrospective interactive rigid image registration between 18F-FDG-PET and X-ray CT. Nuklearmedizin 2005;44(4):149–55. German.PubMed
38.
Hatt M, Cheze le Rest C, Turzo A, Roux C, Visvikis D. A fuzzy locally adaptive Bayesian segmentation approach for volume determination in PET. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2009;28(6):881–93.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Nehmeh SA, Erdi YE, Ling CC, Rosenzweig KE, Schoder H, Larson SM, et al. Effect of respiratory gating on quantifying PET images of lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2002;43(7):876–81.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Partial volume correction strategies for quantitative FDG PET in oncology
Authors
Nikie J. Hoetjes
Floris H. P. van Velden
Otto S. Hoekstra
Corneline J. Hoekstra
Nanda C. Krak
Adriaan A. Lammertsma
Ronald Boellaard
Publication date
01-08-2010
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Issue 9/2010
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Electronic ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-010-1472-7

Other articles of this Issue 9/2010

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 9/2010 Go to the issue

Guidelines

Proposal for standardization of 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) cardiac sympathetic imaging by the EANM Cardiovascular Committee and the European Council of Nuclear Cardiology

Focus on…

Economic evaluation of nuclear medicine procedures

Original Article

18F-Fluoride PET/CT for detection of sacroiliitis in ankylosing spondylitis

Image of the month

Diffusely increased muscular uptake of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose: a clue for the diagnosis of insulinoma?

Original Article

Prognostic impact of 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in untreated mantle cell lymphoma: a retrospective study from the GOELAMS group

Original Article

18F-FDG PET/CT in the characterization and surgical decision concerning adrenal masses: a prospective multicentre evaluation