Top

Published in:

01-02-2017 | Leading Article

Population Pharmacokinetics of Tracers: A New Tool for Medical Imaging?

Authors: Peggy Gandia, Cyril Jaudet, Etienne Chatelut, Didier Concordet

Published in: Clinical Pharmacokinetics | Issue 2/2017

Abstract

Positron emission tomography-computed tomography is a medical imaging method measuring the activity of a radiotracer chosen to accumulate in cancer cells. A recent trend of medical imaging analysis is to account for the radiotracer’s pharmacokinetic properties at a voxel (three-dimensional-pixel) level to separate the different tissues. These analyses are closely linked to population pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic modelling. Kineticists possess the cultural background to improve medical imaging analysis. This article stresses the common points with population pharmacokinetics and highlights the methodological locks that need to be lifted.

Freedman NM, Sundaram SK, Kurdziel K, Carrasquillo JA, Whatley M, Carson JM, et al. Comparison of SUV and Patlak slope for monitoring of cancer therapy using serial PET scans. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30(1):46–53.PubMedCrossRef

Jansen NL, Suchorska B, Wenter V, Schmid-Tannwald C, Todica A, Eigenbrod S, et al. Prognostic significance of dynamic 18F-FET PET in newly diagnosed astrocytic high-grade glioma. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(1):9–15.PubMedCrossRef

Kamasak ME, Bouman CA, Morris ED, Sauer K. Direct reconstruction of kinetic parameter images from dynamic PET data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2005;24(5):636–50.PubMedCrossRef

Lin Y, Haldar J, Li Q, Conti P, Leahy R. Sparsity constrained mixture modeling for the estimation of kinetic parameters in dynamic PET. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2013;33(1):173–85.PubMedPubMedCentral

Janssen MH, Aerts HJ, Ollers MC, Bosmans G, Lee JA, Buijsen J, et al. Tumor delineation based on time-activity curve differences assessed with dynamic fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography in rectal cancer patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;73(2):456–65.PubMedCrossRef

Wang G, Qi J. Generalized algorithms for direct reconstruction of parametric images from dynamic PET data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2009;28(11):1717–26.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Wang G, Qi J. Direct estimation of kinetic parametric images for dynamic PET. Theranostics. 2013;3(10):802–15.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Spence AM, Muzi M, Mankoff DA, O’Sullivan SF, Link JM, Lewellen TK, et al. 18F-FDG PET of gliomas at delayed intervals: improved distinction between tumor and normal gray matter. J Nucl Med. 2004;45(10):1653–9.PubMed

Langen KJ, Hamacher K, Weckesser M, Floeth F, Stoffels G, Bauer D, et al. O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-l-tyrosine: uptake mechanisms and clinical applications. Nucl Med Biol. 2006;33(3):287–94.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Miyagawa T, Oku T, Uehara H, Desai R, Beattie B, Tjuvajev J, et al. “Facilitated” amino acid transport is upregulated in brain tumors. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1998;18(5):500–9.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Galldiks N, Stoffels G, Ruge MI, Rapp M, Sabel M, Reifenberger G, et al. Role of O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-l-tyrosine PET as a diagnostic tool for detection of malignant progression in patients with low-grade glioma. J Nucl Med. 2013;54(12):2046–54.PubMedCrossRef

12.

Jansen NL, Graute V, Armbruster L, Suchorska B, Lutz J, Eigenbrod S, et al. MRI-suspected low-grade glioma: is there a need to perform dynamic FET PET? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39(6):1021–9.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Gordillo N, Montseny E, Sobrevilla P. State of the art survey on MRI brain tumor segmentation. Magn Reson Imaging. 2013;31(8):1426–38.PubMedCrossRef

14.

Lee JA. Segmentation of positron emission tomography images: some recommendations for target delineation in radiation oncology. Radiother Oncol. 2010;96(3):302–7.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Menze BH, Jakab A, Bauer S, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Farahani K, Kirby J, et al. The Multimodal Brain Tumor Image Segmentation Benchmark (BRATS). IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2014;34(10):1–33.

16.

Zaidi H, El Naqa I. PET-guided delineation of radiation therapy treatment volumes: a survey of image segmentation techniques. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37(11):2165–87.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Besag J. Spatial interaction and the statistical analysis of lattice systems. J R Stat Soc Ser B Stat Methodol. 1974;36(2):192–236.

18.

Stanford DC, Raftery AE. Approximate Bayes factors for image segmentation: the Pseudolikelihood Information Criterion (PLIC). IEEE T Pattern Anal. 2002;24(11):1517–20.CrossRef

19.

Dempster AP, Laird NM, Rubin DB. Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. J R Stat Soc Ser B Stat Methodol. 1977;39(1):1–38.

20.

Kuhn E, Lavielle M. Maximum likelihood estimation in nonlinear mixed effects models. Comput Stat Data Anal. 2005;49(4):1020–38.CrossRef

21.

Kolesnikov A, Trichina E, Kauranne T. Estimating the number of clusters in a numerical data set via quantization error modeling. Pattern Recognit. 2015;48(3):941–52.CrossRef

22.

Tibshirani R, Walther G, Hastie T. Estimating the number of clusters in a data set via the gap statistic. J R Stat Soc Ser B Stat Methodol. 2001;63(2):411–23.CrossRef

23.

Erlandsson K, Buvat I, Pretorius PH, Thomas BA, Hutton BF. A review of partial volume correction techniques for emission tomography and their applications in neurology, cardiology and oncology. Phys Med Biol. 2012;57(21):R119–59.PubMedCrossRef

24.

Rahmim A, Qi J, Sossi V. Resolution modeling in PET imaging: theory, practice, benefits, and pitfalls. Med Phys. 2013;40(6):064301.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

25.

Tohka J, Reilhac A. A Monte Carlo study of deconvolution algorithms for partial volume correction in quantitative PET. IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record; 2006. p. 3339–45.

26.

Modat M, Cash DM, Daga P, Winston GP, Duncan JS, Ourselin S. Global image registration using a symmetric block-matching approach. J Med Imaging. 2014;1(2):024003.CrossRef

27.

Cabezas M, Oliver A, Lladó X, Freixenet J, Cuadra MB. A review of atlas-based segmentation for magnetic resonance brain images. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2011;104(3):e158–77.PubMedCrossRef

28.

Parisot S, Darlix A, Baumann C, Zouaoui S, Yordanova Y, Blonski M, et al. A probabilistic atlas of diffuse WHO Grade II glioma locations in the brain. PLoS One. 2016;11(1):e0144200.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

29.

Prastawa M, Bullitt E, Ho S, Gerig G. A brain tumor segmentation framework based on outlier detection. Med Image Anal. 2004;8(3):275–83.PubMedCrossRef

Title: Population Pharmacokinetics of Tracers: A New Tool for Medical Imaging?
Authors: Peggy Gandia
Cyril Jaudet
Etienne Chatelut
Didier Concordet
Publication date: 01-02-2017
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Published in: Clinical Pharmacokinetics / Issue 2/2017
Print ISSN: 0312-5963
Electronic ISSN: 1179-1926
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40262-016-0437-9

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Population Pharmacokinetics of Tracers: A New Tool for Medical Imaging?

Abstract

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2017

Pharmacokinetics, Biotransformation, and Excretion of [14C]Etelcalcetide (AMG 416) Following a Single Microtracer Intravenous Dose in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease on Hemodialysis

Pharmacokinetics of Irinotecan, Oxaliplatin and 5-Fluorouracil During Hepatic Artery Chronomodulated Infusion: A Translational European OPTILIV Study

Comment on: “Modeling the Relationship between Exposure to Abiraterone and Prostate-Specific Antigen Dynamics in Patients with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer”

Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Biologic Therapeutics for Treatment of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Comment on: “Effect of Age and Renal Function on Idarucizumab Pharmacokinetics and Idarucizumab-Mediated Reversal of Dabigatran Anticoagulant Activity in a Randomized, Double-Blind, Crossover Phase Ib Study”

Discrepancies between the Cockcroft–Gault and Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology (CKD-EPI) Equations: Implications for Refining Drug Dosage Adjustment Strategies