Literature DB >> 11504091

Effect of corrections for blood glucose and body size on [18F]FDG PET standardised uptake values in lung cancer.

W A Hallett1, P K Marsden, B F Cronin, M J O'Doherty.   

Abstract

Standardised uptake values (SUVs) are commonly used as a semi-quantitative index of 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) tracer uptake in positron emission tomography (PET). Studies have shown that SUVs may depend on body size and blood glucose concentration and corrections for these effects have been proposed in the literature. This retrospective study investigated the effect of the proposed corrections on SUVs from a group of 154 patients with lung cancer who had scans on a dedicated PET scanner. A total of 252 SUVs were requested as an aid to staging during consideration for surgical resection. SUVs were calculated normalised to body weight (SUVw), lean body mass (SUV(LBM)) and body surface area (SUV(BSA)). The following correlations were examined: SUV with height, weight and body surface area for the different body size normalisations; SUVw and SUVw x blood glucose (SUV(BG)) with blood glucose; SUVw with scan time post injection; and SUVw with apparent lesion diameter. Significant correlations were only observed between: SUV(LBM) and height (P=0.007); SUVw and scan time (P=0.007); SUVw and lesion diameter (P=0.0005); and SUV(BG) and blood glucose (P<0.00001). The correlation between SUV(LBM) and height suggests that lean body mass as a function of height alone should not be used to normalise SUVs; however, the lean body mass calculated from a height and weight nomogram did not show this effect. The strong correlation between SUV(BG) and blood glucose concentration suggests that for non-diabetic fasted patients, lung tumour SUVs should not be adjusted for blood glucose.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11504091     DOI: 10.1007/s002590100561

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med        ISSN: 0340-6997


  12 in total

1.  Lean body mass-based standardized uptake value, derived from a predictive equation, might be misleading in PET studies.

Authors:  Michael Hentschel; Ingo Brink
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2003-01-09       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  FDG-PET: procedure guidelines for tumour imaging.

Authors:  Emilio Bombardieri; Cumali Aktolun; Richard P Baum; Angelika Bishof-Delaloye; John Buscombe; Jean François Chatal; Lorenzo Maffioli; Roy Moncayo; Luc Mortelmans; Sven N Reske
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  A weight index for the standardized uptake value in 2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose-positron emission tomography.

Authors:  Joseph A Thie; Karl F Hubner; Francis P Isidoro; Gary T Smith
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2007 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.488

4.  Quantification of tumour (18) F-FDG uptake: Normalise to blood glucose or scale to liver uptake?

Authors:  Georgia Keramida; Sabina Dizdarevic; Janice Bush; A Michael Peters
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-04-22       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose-positron emission tomography sensitivity to serum glucose: a survey and diagnostic applications.

Authors:  Joseph A Thie; Gary T Smith; Karl F Hubner
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2005 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.488

6.  The use of F-18 choline PET in the assessment of bone metastases in prostate cancer: correlation with morphological changes on CT.

Authors:  Mohsen Beheshti; Reza Vali; Peter Waldenberger; Friedrich Fitz; Michael Nader; Josef Hammer; Wolfgang Loidl; Christian Pirich; Ignac Fogelman; Werner Langsteger
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2009 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.488

7.  The use of F-18 choline PET in the assessment of bone metastases in prostate cancer: correlation with morphological changes on CT.

Authors:  Mohsen Beheshti; Reza Vali; Peter Waldenberger; Friedrich Fitz; Michael Nader; Josef Hammer; Wolfgang Loidl; Christian Pirich; Ignac Fogelman; Werner Langsteger
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2009-07-09       Impact factor: 3.488

8.  The power of FDG-PET to detect treatment effects is increased by glucose correction using a Michaelis constant.

Authors:  Simon-Peter Williams; Judith E Flores-Mercado; Andreas R Baudy; Ruediger E Port; Thomas Bengtsson
Journal:  EJNMMI Res       Date:  2012-06-27       Impact factor: 3.138

9.  Quantitation of glucose uptake in tumors by dynamic FDG-PET has less glucose bias and lower variability when adjusted for partial saturation of glucose transport.

Authors:  Simon-Peter Williams; Judith E Flores-Mercado; Ruediger E Port; Thomas Bengtsson
Journal:  EJNMMI Res       Date:  2012-02-01       Impact factor: 3.138

10.  FDG-PET. A possible prognostic factor in head and neck cancer.

Authors:  W Halfpenny; S F Hain; L Biassoni; M N Maisey; J A Sherman; M McGurk
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2002-02-12       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.