Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-08-2020 | Lymphoma | Research Article

Optimizing Workflows for Fast and Reliable Metabolic Tumor Volume Measurements in Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma

Authors: Coreline N. Burggraaff, Fareen Rahman, Isabelle Kaßner, Simone Pieplenbosch, Sally F. Barrington, Yvonne W.S. Jauw, Gerben J.C. Zwezerijnen, Stefan Müller, Otto S. Hoekstra, Josée M. Zijlstra, Henrica C.W. De Vet, Ronald Boellaard, On behalf of the PETRA Consortium

Published in: Molecular Imaging and Biology | Issue 4/2020

Abstract

Purpose

This pilot study aimed to determine interobserver reliability and ease of use of three workflows for measuring metabolic tumor volume (MTV) and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) in diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

Procedures

Twelve baseline [¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT scans from DLBCL patients with wide variation in number and size of involved organs and lymph nodes were selected from the international PETRA consortium database. Three observers analyzed scans using three workflows. Workflow A: user-defined selection of individual lesions followed by four automated segmentations (41%SUVmax, A50%SUVpeak, SUV≥2.5, SUV≥4.0). For each lesion, observers indicated their “preferred segmentation.” Individually selected lesions were summed to yield total MTV and TLG. Workflow B: fully automated preselection of [¹⁸F]FDG-avid structures (SUV≥4.0 and volume≥3ml), followed by removing non-tumor regions with single mouse clicks. Workflow C: preselected volumes based on Workflow B modified by manually adding lesions or removing physiological uptake, subsequently checked by experienced nuclear medicine physicians. Workflow C was performed 3 months later to avoid recall bias from the initial Workflow B analysis. Interobserver reliability was expressed as intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).

Results

Highest interobserver reliability in Workflow A was found for SUV≥2.5 and SUV≥4.0 methods (ICCs for MTV 0.96 and 0.94, respectively). SUV≥4.0 and A50%Peak were most and SUV≥2.5 was the least preferred segmentation method. Workflow B had an excellent interobserver reliability (ICC = 1.00) for MTV and TLG. Workflow C reduced the ICC for MTV and TLG to 0.92 and 0.97, respectively. Mean workflow analysis time per scan was 29, 7, and 22 min for A, B, and C, respectively.

Conclusions

Improved interobserver reliability and ease of use occurred using fully automated preselection (using SUV≥4.0 and volume≥3ml, Workflow B) compared with individual lesion selection by observers (Workflow A). Subsequent manual modification was necessary for some patients but reduced interobserver reliability which may need to be balanced against potential improvement on prognostic accuracy.

Available only for authorised users

Pfreundschuh M, Ho AD, Cavallin-Stahl E et al (2008) Prognostic significance of maximum tumour (bulk) diameter in young patients with good-prognosis diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma treated with CHOP-like chemotherapy with or without rituximab: an exploratory analysis of the MabThera International Trial Group (MInT) study. Lancet Oncol 9:435–444

Barrington SF, Mikhaeel NG, Kostakoglu L et al (2014) Role of imaging in the staging and response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the International Conference on Malignant Lymphomas Imaging Working Group. J Clin Oncol 32:3048–3058CrossRef

Cheebsumon P, Boellaard R, de Ruysscher D et al (2012) Assessment of tumour size in PET/CT lung cancer studies: PET- and CT-based methods compared to pathology. EJNMMI Res 2:56CrossRef

Frings V, de Langen AJ, Smit EF et al (2010) Repeatability of metabolically active volume measurements with 18F-FDG and 18F-FLT PET in non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med 51:1870–1877CrossRef

Wang XY, Zhao YF, Liu Y, Yang YK, Zhu Z, Wu N (2017) Comparison of different automated lesion delineation methods for metabolic tumor volume of 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with stage I lung adenocarcinoma. Medicine (Baltimore) 96(51):e9365CrossRef

Cottereau AS, Lanic H, Mareschal S et al (2016) Molecular profile and FDG-PET/CT total metabolic tumor volume improve risk classification at diagnosis for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Clin Cancer Res 22:3801–3809CrossRef

Mikhaeel NG, Smith D, Dunn JT et al (2016) Combination of baseline metabolic tumour volume and early response on PET/CT improves progression-free survival prediction in DLBCL. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 43:1209–1219

Sasanelli M, Meignan M, Haioun C et al (2014) Pretherapy metabolic tumour volume is an independent predictor of outcome in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 41:2017–2022CrossRef

Song MK, Chung JS, Shin HJ et al (2012) Clinical significance of metabolic tumor volume by PET/CT in stages II and III of diffuse large B cell lymphoma without extranodal site involvement. Ann Hematol 91:697–703

10.

Ilyas H, Mikhaeel NG, Dunn JT et al (2018) Defining the optimal method for measuring baseline metabolic tumour volume in diffuse large B cell lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 45:1142–1154

11.

Kurtz DM, Green MR, Bratman SV et al (2015) Noninvasive monitoring of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma by immunoglobulin high-throughput sequencing. Blood 125:3679–3687

12.

Meignan M, Sasanelli M, Casasnovas RO et al (2014) Metabolic tumour volumes measured at staging in lymphoma: methodological evaluation on phantom experiments and patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 41:1113–1122

13.

Kostakoglu L, Chauvie S (2018) Metabolic tumor volume metrics in lymphoma. Semin Nucl Med 48:50–66CrossRef

14.

Cottereau AS, Hapdey S, Chartier L et al (2017) Baseline total metabolic tumor volume measured with fixed or different adaptive thresholding methods equally predicts outcome in peripheral T cell lymphoma. J Nucl Med 58:276–281

15.

Kanoun S, Tal I, Berriolo-Riedinger A et al (2015) Influence of software tool and methodological aspects of total metabolic tumor volume calculation on baseline [18F]FDG PET to predict survival in Hodgkin lymphoma. PLoS One 10:e0140830CrossRef

16.

Boellaard R (2018) Quantitative oncology molecular analysis suite: ACCURATE [abstract]. J Nucl Med 59(suppl.1):1753

17.

Frings V, van Velden FH, Velasquez LM et al (2014) Repeatability of metabolically active tumor volume measurements with FDG PET/CT in advanced gastrointestinal malignancies: a multicenter study. Radiology. 273:539–548

18.

Schaefer A, Vermandel M, Baillet C et al (2016) Impact of consensus contours from multiple PET segmentation methods on the accuracy of functional volume delineation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 43:911–924

19.

McGraw KO, Wong SP (1996) Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol Methods 1:30–46CrossRef

20.

Koo TK, Li MY (2016) A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med 15:155–163CrossRef

21.

Portney LG, Watkins MP (2009) Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). In: Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice. Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, pp 588–598

22.

Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1:307–310CrossRef

23.

Barrington SF, de Vet HCW, Mikhaeel NG, et al. (2018) Automated segmentation of total tumour burden in DLBCL: which method is most successful? 7^thPILM, Menton [Abstract V1] https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1a0q5uYLBx6HqcUjBxTryiWPUOWFTJGLG;

24.

Ceriani L, Milan L, Johnson PWM et al (2019) Baseline PET features to predict prognosis in primary mediastinal B cell lymphoma: a comparative analysis of different methods for measuring baseline metabolic tumour volume. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 46:1334–1344CrossRef

25.

Barrington SF, Meignan MA (2019) Time to prepare for risk adaptation in lymphoma by standardising measurement of metabolic tumour burden. J Nucl Med 60:1096–1102CrossRef

26.

Parvez A, Tau N, Hussey D, Maganti M, Metser U (2018) (18)F-FDG PET/CT metabolic tumor parameters and radiomics features in aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma as predictors of treatment outcome and survival. Ann Nucl Med 32:410–416CrossRef

Title: Optimizing Workflows for Fast and Reliable Metabolic Tumor Volume Measurements in Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma
Authors: Coreline N. Burggraaff
Fareen Rahman
Isabelle Kaßner
Simone Pieplenbosch
Sally F. Barrington
Yvonne W.S. Jauw
Gerben J.C. Zwezerijnen
Stefan Müller
Otto S. Hoekstra
Josée M. Zijlstra
Henrica C.W. De Vet
Ronald Boellaard
On behalf of the PETRA Consortium
Publication date: 01-08-2020
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Keywords: Lymphoma
Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma
Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma
Published in: Molecular Imaging and Biology / Issue 4/2020
Print ISSN: 1536-1632
Electronic ISSN: 1860-2002
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-020-01474-z

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Optimizing Workflows for Fast and Reliable Metabolic Tumor Volume Measurements in Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma

Abstract

Purpose

Procedures

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Procedures

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2020

The Acute and Early Effects of Whole-Brain Irradiation on Glial Activation, Brain Metabolism, and Behavior: a Positron Emission Tomography Study

Application of [68Ga]PSMA PET/CT in Diagnosis and Management of Prostate Cancer Patients

A Pretargeted Imaging Strategy for Immune Checkpoint Ligand PD-L1 Expression in Tumor Based on Bioorthogonal Diels-Alder Click Chemistry

Effects of Fever on 18F-FDG Distribution In Vivo: a Preliminary Study

Modeling of [18F]FEOBV Pharmacokinetics in Rat Brain

Preclinical Evaluation and Dosimetry of [111In]CHX-DTPA-scFv78-Fc Targeting Endosialin/Tumor Endothelial Marker 1 (TEM1)