Literature DB >> 24080994

Dynamic whole-body PET parametric imaging: II. Task-oriented statistical estimation.

Nicolas A Karakatsanis1, Martin A Lodge, Y Zhou, Richard L Wahl, Arman Rahmim.   

Abstract

In the context of oncology, dynamic PET imaging coupled with standard graphical linear analysis has been previously employed to enable quantitative estimation of tracer kinetic parameters of physiological interest at the voxel level, thus, enabling quantitative PET parametric imaging. However, dynamic PET acquisition protocols have been confined to the limited axial field-of-view (~15-20 cm) of a single-bed position and have not been translated to the whole-body clinical imaging domain. On the contrary, standardized uptake value (SUV) PET imaging, considered as the routine approach in clinical oncology, commonly involves multi-bed acquisitions, but is performed statically, thus not allowing for dynamic tracking of the tracer distribution. Here, we pursue a transition to dynamic whole-body PET parametric imaging, by presenting, within a unified framework, clinically feasible multi-bed dynamic PET acquisition protocols and parametric imaging methods. In a companion study, we presented a novel clinically feasible dynamic (4D) multi-bed PET acquisition protocol as well as the concept of whole-body PET parametric imaging employing Patlak ordinary least squares (OLS) regression to estimate the quantitative parameters of tracer uptake rate Ki and total blood distribution volume V. In the present study, we propose an advanced hybrid linear regression framework, driven by Patlak kinetic voxel correlations, to achieve superior trade-off between contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and mean squared error (MSE) than provided by OLS for the final Ki parametric images, enabling task-based performance optimization. Overall, whether the observer's task is to detect a tumor or quantitatively assess treatment response, the proposed statistical estimation framework can be adapted to satisfy the specific task performance criteria, by adjusting the Patlak correlation-coefficient (WR) reference value. The multi-bed dynamic acquisition protocol, as optimized in the preceding companion study, was employed along with extensive Monte Carlo simulations and an initial clinical (18)F-deoxyglucose patient dataset to validate and demonstrate the potential of the proposed statistical estimation methods. Both simulated and clinical results suggest that hybrid regression in the context of whole-body Patlak Ki imaging considerably reduces MSE without compromising high CNR. Alternatively, for a given CNR, hybrid regression enables larger reductions than OLS in the number of dynamic frames per bed, allowing for even shorter acquisitions of ~30 min, thus further contributing to the clinical adoption of the proposed framework. Compared to the SUV approach, whole-body parametric imaging can provide better tumor quantification, and can act as a complement to SUV, for the task of tumor detection.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24080994      PMCID: PMC3941010          DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/58/20/7419

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  51 in total

1.  Anatomy of SUV. Standardized uptake value.

Authors:  S C Huang
Journal:  Nucl Med Biol       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 2.408

Review 2.  Four-dimensional (4D) image reconstruction strategies in dynamic PET: beyond conventional independent frame reconstruction.

Authors:  Arman Rahmim; Jing Tang; Habib Zaidi
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants from multiple-time uptake data. Generalizations.

Authors:  C S Patlak; R G Blasberg
Journal:  J Cereb Blood Flow Metab       Date:  1985-12       Impact factor: 6.200

4.  Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants from multiple-time uptake data.

Authors:  C S Patlak; R G Blasberg; J D Fenstermacher
Journal:  J Cereb Blood Flow Metab       Date:  1983-03       Impact factor: 6.200

5.  Use of ridge regression for improved estimation of kinetic constants from PET data.

Authors:  F O'Sullivan; A Saha
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 10.048

6.  Reproducibility of metabolic measurements in malignant tumors using FDG PET.

Authors:  W A Weber; S I Ziegler; R Thödtmann; A R Hanauske; M Schwaiger
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 10.057

7.  Enhanced FDG-PET tumor imaging with correlation-coefficient filtered influx-constant images.

Authors:  K R Zasadny; R L Wahl
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 10.057

8.  Dependency of standardized uptake values of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose on body size: comparison of body surface area correction and lean body mass correction.

Authors:  C K Kim; N C Gupta
Journal:  Nucl Med Commun       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 1.690

9.  Standardized uptake values of FDG: body surface area correction is preferable to body weight correction.

Authors:  C K Kim; N C Gupta; B Chandramouli; A Alavi
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 10.057

10.  Assessment of quantitative FDG PET data in primary colorectal tumours: which parameters are important with respect to tumour detection?

Authors:  Ludwig G Strauss; Sven Klippel; Leyun Pan; Klaus Schönleben; Uwe Haberkorn; Antonia Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2007-01-12       Impact factor: 10.057

View more
  24 in total

1.  Noise propagation in resolution modeled PET imaging and its impact on detectability.

Authors:  Arman Rahmim; Jing Tang
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-09-13       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Quantitative Analysis of Heterogeneous [18F]FDG Static (SUV) vs. Patlak (Ki) Whole-body PET Imaging Using Different Segmentation Methods: a Simulation Study.

Authors:  Mingzan Zhuang; Nicolas A Karakatsanis; Rudi A J O Dierckx; Habib Zaidi
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 3.488

3.  Clinical perspectives for the use of total body PET/CT.

Authors:  Ronan Abgral; David Bourhis; Pierre-Yves Salaun
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2021-06       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 4.  Dynamic whole-body PET imaging: principles, potentials and applications.

Authors:  Arman Rahmim; Martin A Lodge; Nicolas A Karakatsanis; Vladimir Y Panin; Yun Zhou; Alan McMillan; Steve Cho; Habib Zaidi; Michael E Casey; Richard L Wahl
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2018-09-29       Impact factor: 9.236

5.  Impact of Tissue Classification in MRI-Guided Attenuation Correction on Whole-Body Patlak PET/MRI.

Authors:  Mingzan Zhuang; Nicolas A Karakatsanis; Rudi A J O Dierckx; Habib Zaidi
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 3.488

6.  Task-based detectability in CT image reconstruction by filtered backprojection and penalized likelihood estimation.

Authors:  Grace J Gang; J Webster Stayman; Wojciech Zbijewski; Jeffrey H Siewerdsen
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Patlak image estimation from dual time-point list-mode PET data.

Authors:  Wentao Zhu; Quanzheng Li; Bing Bai; Peter S Conti; Richard M Leahy
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 10.048

8.  Imager-4D: New Software for Viewing Dynamic PET Scans and Extracting Radiomic Parameters from PET Data.

Authors:  Steven P Rowe; Lilja B Solnes; Yafu Yin; Grant Kitchen; Martin A Lodge; Nicolas A Karakatsanis; Arman Rahmim; Martin G Pomper; Jeffrey P Leal
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 4.056

Review 9.  Towards enhanced PET quantification in clinical oncology.

Authors:  Habib Zaidi; Nicolas Karakatsanis
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-11-22       Impact factor: 3.039

10.  Structural and practical identifiability of dual-input kinetic modeling in dynamic PET of liver inflammation.

Authors:  Yang Zuo; Souvik Sarkar; Michael T Corwin; Kristin Olson; Ramsey D Badawi; Guobao Wang
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2019-09-05       Impact factor: 3.609

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.