UNLABELLED: This study investigated the feasibility of quantitative accuracy and harmonized image quality in (89)Zr-PET/CT multicenter studies. METHODS: Five PET/CT scanners from 3 vendors were included. (89)Zr activity was measured in a central dose calibrator before delivery. Local activity assays were based on volume as well as on the local dose calibrator. Accuracy and image noise were determined from a cross calibration experiment. Image quality was assessed from recovery coefficients derived from different volume-of-interest (VOI) methods (VOI A 50%, based on a 3-dimensional isocontour at 50% of the maximum voxel value with local background correction; VOI Max, based on the voxel with the highest uptake; and VOI 3Dpeak, based on a spheric VOI of 1.2-cm diameter positioned so as to maximize the enclosed average). PET images were analyzed before and after postreconstruction smoothing, applied to match image noise. RESULTS: PET/CT accuracy and image noise ranged from -3% to 10% and from 13% to 22%, respectively. VOI 3Dpeak produced the most reproducible recovery coefficients. After calibration of the local dose calibrator to the central dose calibrator, differences between the local activity assays were within 6%. CONCLUSION: This study showed that quantitative accuracy and harmonized image quality can be reached in (89)Zr PET/CT multicenter studies.
UNLABELLED: This study investigated the feasibility of quantitative accuracy and harmonized image quality in (89)Zr-PET/CT multicenter studies. METHODS: Five PET/CT scanners from 3 vendors were included. (89)Zr activity was measured in a central dose calibrator before delivery. Local activity assays were based on volume as well as on the local dose calibrator. Accuracy and image noise were determined from a cross calibration experiment. Image quality was assessed from recovery coefficients derived from different volume-of-interest (VOI) methods (VOI A 50%, based on a 3-dimensional isocontour at 50% of the maximum voxel value with local background correction; VOI Max, based on the voxel with the highest uptake; and VOI 3Dpeak, based on a spheric VOI of 1.2-cm diameter positioned so as to maximize the enclosed average). PET images were analyzed before and after postreconstruction smoothing, applied to match image noise. RESULTS: PET/CT accuracy and image noise ranged from -3% to 10% and from 13% to 22%, respectively. VOI 3Dpeak produced the most reproducible recovery coefficients. After calibration of the local dose calibrator to the central dose calibrator, differences between the local activity assays were within 6%. CONCLUSION: This study showed that quantitative accuracy and harmonized image quality can be reached in (89)Zr PET/CT multicenter studies.
Authors: Tyler J Bradshaw; Martin J Voorbach; David R Reuter; Anthony M Giamis; Sarah R Mudd; John D Beaver Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Young Sub Lee; Jin Su Kim; Jung Young Kim; Byung Il Kim; Sang Moo Lim; Hee-Joung Kim Journal: Cancer Biother Radiopharm Date: 2014-12-30 Impact factor: 3.099
Authors: Human Adams; Bob Meek; Ewoudt Mw van de Garde; Coline Hm van Moorsel; Danielle J Vugts; Ruth G Keijsers; Jan C Grutters Journal: Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2020-08-25
Authors: Yaser Hadi Gholami; Hushan Yuan; Moses Q Wilks; Richard Maschmeyer; Marc D Normandin; Lee Josephson; Georges El Fakhri; Zdenka Kuncic Journal: Int J Nanomedicine Date: 2020-02-24
Authors: Idris Bahce; Marc C Huisman; Eline E Verwer; Rogier Ooijevaar; Firdaouss Boutkourt; Danielle J Vugts; Guus Ams van Dongen; Ronald Boellaard; Egbert F Smit Journal: EJNMMI Res Date: 2014-08-02 Impact factor: 3.138
Authors: Yvonne W S Jauw; C Willemien Menke-van der Houven van Oordt; Otto S Hoekstra; N Harry Hendrikse; Danielle J Vugts; Josée M Zijlstra; Marc C Huisman; Guus A M S van Dongen Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2016-05-24 Impact factor: 5.810
Authors: Jakob W Kist; Manfred van der Vlies; Otto S Hoekstra; Henri N J M Greuter; Bart de Keizer; Marcel P M Stokkel; Wouter V Vogel; Marc C Huisman; Arthur van Lingen Journal: EJNMMI Res Date: 2016-04-27 Impact factor: 3.138
Authors: Catharina Willemien Menke-van der Houven van Oordt; Elske C Gootjes; Marc C Huisman; Danielle J Vugts; Chantal Roth; Anne Marije Luik; Emma R Mulder; Robert C Schuit; Ronald Boellaard; Otto S Hoekstra; Guus Ams van Dongen; Henk M W Verheul Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2015-10-06