Literature DB >> 24900058

Comparison of SUVs Normalized by Lean Body Mass Determined by CT with Those Normalized by Lean Body Mass Estimated by Predictive Equations in Normal Tissues.

Woo Hyoung Kim1, Chang Guhn Kim2, Dae-Weung Kim2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Standardized uptake values (SUVs) normalized by lean body mass (LBM) determined by CT were compared with those normalized by LBM estimated using predictive equations (PEs) in normal liver, spleen, and aorta using (18)F-FDG PET/CT.
METHODS: Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (F-FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) was conducted on 453 patients. LBM determined by CT was defined in 3 ways (LBMCT1-3). Five PEs were used for comparison (LBMPE1-5). Tissue SUV normalized by LBM (SUL) was calculated using LBM from each method (SULCT1-3, SULPE1-5). Agreement between methods was assessed by Bland-Altman analysis. Percentage difference and percentage error were also calculated.
RESULTS: For all liver SULCTs vs. liver SULPEs except liver SULPE3, the range of biases, SDs of percentage difference and percentage errors were -0.17-0.24 SUL, 6.15-10.17 %, and 25.07- 38.91 %, respectively. For liver SULCTs vs. liver SULPE3, the corresponding figures were 0.47-0.69 SUL, 10.90-11.25 %, and 50.85-51.55 %, respectively, showing the largest percentage errors and positive biases. Irrespective of magnitudes of the biases, large percentage errors of 25.07-51.55 % were observed between liver SULCT1-3 and liver SULPE1-5. The results of spleen and aorta SULCTs and SULPEs comparison were almost identical to those for liver.
CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrated substantial errors in individual SULPEs compared with SULCTs as a reference value. Normalization of SUV by LBM determined by CT rather than PEs may be a useful approach to reduce errors in individual SULPEs.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Lean body mass; Normalization; PET/CT; Standardized uptake value

Year:  2012        PMID: 24900058      PMCID: PMC4043039          DOI: 10.1007/s13139-012-0146-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nucl Med Mol Imaging        ISSN: 1869-3474


  23 in total

Review 1.  Measuring agreement in method comparison studies.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 3.021

2.  Standardized uptake value in pediatric patients: an investigation to determine the optimum measurement parameter.

Authors:  H W Yeung; A Sanches; O D Squire; H A Macapinlac; S M Larson; Y E Erdi
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2001-11-22       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  Body mass index as a measure of body fatness: age- and sex-specific prediction formulas.

Authors:  P Deurenberg; J A Weststrate; J C Seidell
Journal:  Br J Nutr       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 3.718

Review 4.  Standards for PET image acquisition and quantitative data analysis.

Authors:  Ronald Boellaard
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2009-04-20       Impact factor: 10.057

Review 5.  Design, analysis, and interpretation of method-comparison studies.

Authors:  Sandra K Hanneman
Journal:  AACN Adv Crit Care       Date:  2008 Apr-Jun

6.  Cadaver validation of skeletal muscle measurement by magnetic resonance imaging and computerized tomography.

Authors:  N Mitsiopoulos; R N Baumgartner; S B Heymsfield; W Lyons; D Gallagher; R Ross
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  1998-07

7.  The Feasibility of (18)F-Fluorothymidine PET for Prediction of Tumor Response after Induction Chemotherapy Followed by Chemoradiotherapy with S-1/Oxaliplatin in Patients with Resectable Esophageal Cancer.

Authors:  Seol Hoon Park; Jin-Sook Ryu; Seung-Jun Oh; Seung-Il Park; Yong Hee Kim; Hoon-Yong Jung; Gin Hyug Lee; Ho Jun Song; Jong Hoon Kim; Ho-Young Song; Kyoung Ja Cho; Sung-Bae Kim
Journal:  Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2012-01-03

8.  Evaluation of various corrections to the standardized uptake value for diagnosis of pulmonary malignancy.

Authors:  Y Menda; D L Bushnell; M T Madsen; K McLaughlin; D Kahn; K H Kernstine
Journal:  Nucl Med Commun       Date:  2001-10       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

Review 10.  Lean body mass as a predictor of drug dosage. Implications for drug therapy.

Authors:  D J Morgan; K M Bray
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1994-04       Impact factor: 6.447

View more
  6 in total

1.  Usefulness of standardized uptake value normalized by individual CT-based lean body mass in application of PET response criteria in solid tumors (PERCIST).

Authors:  Atsushi Narita; Susumu Shiomi; Yutaka Katayama; Takashi Yamanaga; Hiromitsu Daisaki; Kazuo Hamada; Yasuyoshi Watanabe
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2016-02-12

2.  Direct Determination of Lean Body Mass by CT in F-18 FDG PET/CT Studies: Comparison with Estimates Using Predictive Equations.

Authors:  Chang Guhn Kim; Woo Hyoung Kim; Myoung Hyoun Kim; Dae-Weung Kim
Journal:  Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2013-05-07

Review 3.  EANM/EARL harmonization strategies in PET quantification: from daily practice to multicentre oncological studies.

Authors:  Nicolas Aide; Charline Lasnon; Patrick Veit-Haibach; Terez Sera; Bernhard Sattler; Ronald Boellaard
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2017-06-16       Impact factor: 9.236

4.  Multiparametric FDG-PET/MRI of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Initial Experience.

Authors:  Stefanie J Hectors; Mathilde Wagner; Cecilia Besa; Wei Huang; Bachir Taouli
Journal:  Contrast Media Mol Imaging       Date:  2018-10-03       Impact factor: 3.161

5.  SUVfdg: A standard-uptake-value (SUV) body habitus normalizer specific to fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) in humans.

Authors:  Bradley J Beattie; Tim J Akhurst; Finn Augensen; John L Humm
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-04-21       Impact factor: 3.752

6.  Timing of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography maximum standardized uptake value for diagnosis of local recurrence of non-small cell lung cancer after stereotactic body radiation therapy.

Authors:  Daren Tan; Suki Gill; Nelson Loh
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2020-08-26       Impact factor: 4.452

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.