UNLABELLED: (18)F-FDG PET is often used to monitor tumor response in multicenter oncology clinical trials. This study assessed the repeatability of several semiquantitative standardized uptake values (mean SUV [SUV(mean)], maximum SUV [SUV(max)], peak SUV [SUV(peak)], and the 3-dimensional isocontour at 70% of the maximum pixel value [SUV(70%)]) as measured by repeated baseline (18)F-FDG PET studies in a multicenter phase I oncology trial. METHODS: Double-baseline (18)F-FDG PET studies were acquired for 62 sequentially enrolled patients. Tumor metabolic activity was assessed by SUV(mean), SUV(max), SUV(peak), and SUV(70%). The effect on SUV repeatability of compliance with recommended image-acquisition guidelines and quality assurance (QA) standards was assessed. Summary statistics for absolute differences relative to the average of baseline values and repeatability analysis were performed for all patients and for a subgroup that passed QA, in both a multi- and a single-observer setting. Intrasubject precision of baseline measurements was assessed by repeatability coefficients, intrasubject coefficients of variation (CV), and confidence intervals on mean baseline differences for all SUV parameters. RESULTS: The mean differences between the 2 SUV baseline measurements were small, varying from -2.1% to 1.9%, and the 95% confidence intervals for these mean differences had a maximum half-width of about 5.6% across the SUV parameters assessed. For SUV(max), the intrasubject CV varied from 10.7% to 12.8% for the QA multi- and single-observer datasets and was 16% for the full dataset. The 95% repeatability coefficients ranged from -28.4% to 39.6% for the QA datasets and up to -34.3% to 52.3% for the full dataset. CONCLUSION: Repeatability results of double-baseline (18)F-FDG PET scans were similar for all SUV parameters assessed, for both the full and the QA datasets, in both the multi- and the single-observer settings. Centralized quality assurance and analysis of data improved intrasubject CV from 15.9% to 10.7% for averaged SUV(max). Thresholds for metabolic response in the multicenter multiobserver non-QA settings were -34% and 52% and in the range of -26% to 39% with centralized QA. These results support the use of (18)F-FDG PET for tumor assessment in multicenter oncology clinical trials.
UNLABELLED: (18)F-FDG PET is often used to monitor tumor response in multicenter oncology clinical trials. This study assessed the repeatability of several semiquantitative standardized uptake values (mean SUV [SUV(mean)], maximum SUV [SUV(max)], peak SUV [SUV(peak)], and the 3-dimensional isocontour at 70% of the maximum pixel value [SUV(70%)]) as measured by repeated baseline (18)F-FDG PET studies in a multicenter phase I oncology trial. METHODS: Double-baseline (18)F-FDG PET studies were acquired for 62 sequentially enrolled patients. Tumor metabolic activity was assessed by SUV(mean), SUV(max), SUV(peak), and SUV(70%). The effect on SUV repeatability of compliance with recommended image-acquisition guidelines and quality assurance (QA) standards was assessed. Summary statistics for absolute differences relative to the average of baseline values and repeatability analysis were performed for all patients and for a subgroup that passed QA, in both a multi- and a single-observer setting. Intrasubject precision of baseline measurements was assessed by repeatability coefficients, intrasubject coefficients of variation (CV), and confidence intervals on mean baseline differences for all SUV parameters. RESULTS: The mean differences between the 2 SUV baseline measurements were small, varying from -2.1% to 1.9%, and the 95% confidence intervals for these mean differences had a maximum half-width of about 5.6% across the SUV parameters assessed. For SUV(max), the intrasubject CV varied from 10.7% to 12.8% for the QA multi- and single-observer datasets and was 16% for the full dataset. The 95% repeatability coefficients ranged from -28.4% to 39.6% for the QA datasets and up to -34.3% to 52.3% for the full dataset. CONCLUSION: Repeatability results of double-baseline (18)F-FDG PET scans were similar for all SUV parameters assessed, for both the full and the QA datasets, in both the multi- and the single-observer settings. Centralized quality assurance and analysis of data improved intrasubject CV from 15.9% to 10.7% for averaged SUV(max). Thresholds for metabolic response in the multicenter multiobserver non-QA settings were -34% and 52% and in the range of -26% to 39% with centralized QA. These results support the use of (18)F-FDG PET for tumor assessment in multicenter oncology clinical trials.
Authors: Frederic H Fahey; Paul E Kinahan; Robert K Doot; Mehmet Kocak; Harold Thurston; Tina Young Poussaint Journal: Med Phys Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Wolfgang A Weber; Constantine A Gatsonis; P David Mozley; Lucy G Hanna; Anthony F Shields; Denise R Aberle; Ramaswamy Govindan; Drew A Torigian; Joel S Karp; Jian Q Michael Yu; Rathan M Subramaniam; Robert A Halvorsen; Barry A Siegel Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2015-04-23 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Robert L Harrison; Brian F Elston; Robert K Doot; Thomas K Lewellen; David A Mankoff; Paul E Kinahan Journal: Transl Oncol Date: 2014-02-01 Impact factor: 4.243
Authors: Yusuf Menda; Laura L Boles Ponto; Michael K Schultz; Gideon K D Zamba; G Leonard Watkins; David L Bushnell; Mark T Madsen; John J Sunderland; Michael M Graham; Thomas M O'Dorisio; M Sue O'Dorisio Journal: Pancreas Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 3.327
Authors: Christie Lin; Tyler Bradshaw; Timothy Perk; Stephanie Harmon; Jens Eickhoff; Ngoneh Jallow; Peter L Choyke; William L Dahut; Steven Larson; John Laurence Humm; Scott Perlman; Andrea B Apolo; Michael J Morris; Glenn Liu; Robert Jeraj Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2016-07-21 Impact factor: 10.057