Literature DB >> 20443503

Effects of shortened acquisition time on accuracy and precision of quantitative estimates of organ activity.

Bin He1, Eric C Frey.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Quantitative estimation of in vivo organ uptake is an essential part of treatment planning for targeted radionuclide therapy. This usually involves the use of planar or SPECT scans with acquisition times chosen based more on image quality considerations rather than the minimum needed for precise quantification. In previous simulation studies at clinical count levels (185 MBq 111In), the authors observed larger variations in accuracy of organ activity estimates resulting from anatomical and uptake differences than statistical noise. This suggests that it is possible to reduce the acquisition time without substantially increasing the variation in accuracy.
METHODS: To test this hypothesis, the authors compared the accuracy and variation in accuracy of organ activity estimates obtained from planar and SPECT scans at various count levels. A simulated phantom population with realistic variations in anatomy and biodistribution was used to model variability in a patient population. Planar and SPECT projections were simulated using previously validated Monte Carlo simulation tools. The authors simulated the projections at count levels approximately corresponding to 1.5-30 min of total acquisition time. The projections were processed using previously described quantitative SPECT (QSPECT) and planar (QPlanar) methods. The QSPECT method was based on the OS-EM algorithm with compensations for attenuation, scatter, and collimator-detector response. The QPlanar method is based on the ML-EM algorithm using the same model-based compensation for all the image degrading effects as the QSPECT method. The volumes of interests (VOIs) were defined based on the true organ configuration in the phantoms. The errors in organ activity estimates from different count levels and processing methods were compared in terms of mean and standard deviation over the simulated phantom population.
RESULTS: There was little degradation in quantitative reliability when the acquisition time was reduced by half for the QSPECT method (the mean error changed by < 1%, e.g., 0.9%-0.3% = 0.6% for the spleen). The magnitude of the errors and variations in errors for large organ with high uptake were still acceptable for 1.5 min scans, even though the errors were slightly larger than those for the 30 min scans (i.e., < 2% for liver, < 3% for heart). The errors over the ranges of scan times studied for the QPlanar method were all within 0.3% for all organs.
CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that, for the purposes of organ activity estimation, acquisition times could be reduced at least by a factor of 2 for the QSPECT and QPlanar methods with little effect on the errors in organ activity estimates. The acquisition time can be further reduced for the QPlanar method, assuming well-registered VOIs are available and the activity distribution in organs can be treated as uniform. Although the differences in accuracy and precision were statistically significant for all the acquisition times shorter than 30 min, the magnitude of the changes in accuracy and precision were small and likely not clinically important. The reduction in SPECT acquisition time justified by this study makes the use of SPECT a more clinically practical alternative to conventional planar scanning for targeted radiotherapy treatment planning.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20443503      PMCID: PMC2864672          DOI: 10.1118/1.3358119

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  25 in total

1.  The importance and implementation of accurate 3D compensation methods for quantitative SPECT.

Authors:  B M Tsui; E C Frey; X Zhao; D S Lalush; R E Johnston; W H McCartney
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  A dual-photopeak window method for scatter correction.

Authors:  M A King; G J Hademenos; S J Glick
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 10.057

3.  Fast modelling of the collimator-detector response in Monte Carlo simulation of SPECT imaging using the angular response function.

Authors:  X Song; W P Segars; Y Du; B M W Tsui; E C Frey
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2005-04-06       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Comparison of conventional, model-based quantitative planar, and quantitative SPECT image processing methods for organ activity estimation using In-111 agents.

Authors:  Bin He; Eric C Frey
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2006-08-02       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  In vivo quantitation of lesion radioactivity using external counting methods.

Authors:  S R Thomas; H R Maxon; J G Kereiakes
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1976 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 6.  Quantitative SPECT imaging: a review and recommendations by the Focus Committee of the Society of Nuclear Medicine Computer and Instrumentation Council.

Authors:  M S Rosenthal; J Cullom; W Hawkins; S C Moore; B M Tsui; M Yester
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 10.057

7.  CT-SPECT fusion plus conjugate views for determining dosimetry in iodine-131-monoclonal antibody therapy of lymphoma patients.

Authors:  K F Koral; K R Zasadny; M L Kessler; J Q Luo; S F Buchbinder; M S Kaminski; I Francis; R L Wahl
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 10.057

8.  Improved SPECT quantification using compensation for scattered photons.

Authors:  R J Jaszczak; K L Greer; C E Floyd; C C Harris; R E Coleman
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1984-08       Impact factor: 10.057

9.  Preliminary validation of the opposing view method for quantitative gamma camera imaging.

Authors:  J F Eary; F L Appelbaum; L Durack; P Brown
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1989 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Volume reduction versus radiation dose for tumors in previously untreated lymphoma patients who received iodine-131 tositumomab therapy. Conjugate views compared with a hybrid method.

Authors:  Kenneth F Koral; Isaac R Francis; Stewart Kroll; Kenneth R Zasadny; Mark S Kaminski; Richard L Wahl
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2002-02-15       Impact factor: 6.860

View more
  8 in total

1.  EQPlanar: a maximum-likelihood method for accurate organ activity estimation from whole body planar projections.

Authors:  N Song; B He; R L Wahl; E C Frey
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2011-08-03       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Development and evaluation of a model-based downscatter compensation method for quantitative I-131 SPECT.

Authors:  Na Song; Yong Du; Bin He; Eric C Frey
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  MIRD pamphlet No. 23: quantitative SPECT for patient-specific 3-dimensional dosimetry in internal radionuclide therapy.

Authors:  Yuni K Dewaraja; Eric C Frey; George Sgouros; A Bertrand Brill; Peter Roberson; Pat B Zanzonico; Michael Ljungberg
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2012-06-28       Impact factor: 10.057

4.  Micro-single-photon emission computed tomography image acquisition and quantification of sodium-iodide symporter-mediated radionuclide accumulation in mouse thyroid and salivary glands.

Authors:  Michael P Brandt; Richard T Kloos; Daniel H Shen; Xiaoli Zhang; Yu-Yu Liu; Sissy M Jhiang
Journal:  Thyroid       Date:  2012-04-27       Impact factor: 6.568

Review 5.  Imaging and dosimetry for alpha-particle emitter radiopharmaceutical therapy: improving radiopharmaceutical therapy by looking into the black box.

Authors:  George Sgouros; Eric Frey; Yong Du; Rob Hobbs; Wesley Bolch
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2021-11-16       Impact factor: 9.236

6.  MIRD pamphlet No. 24: Guidelines for quantitative 131I SPECT in dosimetry applications.

Authors:  Yuni K Dewaraja; Michael Ljungberg; Alan J Green; Pat B Zanzonico; Eric C Frey; Wesley E Bolch; A Bertrand Brill; Mark Dunphy; Darrell R Fisher; Roger W Howell; Ruby F Meredith; George Sgouros; Barry W Wessels
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2013-10-15       Impact factor: 10.057

Review 7.  Quantitative Imaging for Targeted Radionuclide Therapy Dosimetry - Technical Review.

Authors:  Tiantian Li; Edwin C I Ao; Bieke Lambert; Boudewijn Brans; Stefaan Vandenberghe; Greta S P Mok
Journal:  Theranostics       Date:  2017-10-13       Impact factor: 11.556

8.  Fast technetium-99m liver SPECT for evaluation of the pretreatment procedure for radioembolization dosimetry.

Authors:  Sandra van der Velden; Martijn M A Dietze; Max A Viergever; Hugo W A M de Jong
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2018-11-13       Impact factor: 4.071

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.