PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to develop a methodology for the comparison of pathology specimens after prostatectomy (post-S) with PET images obtained before surgery (pre-S). This method was used to evaluate the merit of (11)C-choline PET/CT for delineation of gross tumour volume (GTV) in prostate cancer (PC). METHODS: In 28 PC patients, (11)C-choline PET/CT was performed before surgery. PET/CT data were coregistered with the pathology specimens. GTV on PET images (GTV-PET) was outlined automatically and corrected manually. Tumour volume in the prostate (TVP) was delineated manually on the pathology specimens. Based on the coregistered PET/pathology images, the following parameters were assessed: SUVmax and SUVmean in the tumoral and nontumoral prostate (NP), GTV-PET (millilitres) and TVP (millilitres). RESULTS: PET/pathology image coregistration was satisfactory. Mean SUVmax in the TVP was lower than in the NP: 5.0 and 5.5, respectively (p = 0.093). Considering the entire prostate, SUVmax was located in the TVP in two patients, in the TVP and NP in 12 patients and exclusively in NP in 14 patients. Partial overlap the TVP and GTV-PET was seen in 71% of patients, and complete overlap in 4%. CONCLUSION: PET/pathology image coregistration can be used for evaluation of different imaging modalities. (11)C-Choline PET failed to distinguish tumour from nontumour tissue.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to develop a methodology for the comparison of pathology specimens after prostatectomy (post-S) with PET images obtained before surgery (pre-S). This method was used to evaluate the merit of (11)C-choline PET/CT for delineation of gross tumour volume (GTV) in prostate cancer (PC). METHODS: In 28 PC patients, (11)C-choline PET/CT was performed before surgery. PET/CT data were coregistered with the pathology specimens. GTV on PET images (GTV-PET) was outlined automatically and corrected manually. Tumour volume in the prostate (TVP) was delineated manually on the pathology specimens. Based on the coregistered PET/pathology images, the following parameters were assessed: SUVmax and SUVmean in the tumoral and nontumoral prostate (NP), GTV-PET (millilitres) and TVP (millilitres). RESULTS: PET/pathology image coregistration was satisfactory. Mean SUVmax in the TVP was lower than in the NP: 5.0 and 5.5, respectively (p = 0.093). Considering the entire prostate, SUVmax was located in the TVP in two patients, in the TVP and NP in 12 patients and exclusively in NP in 14 patients. Partial overlap the TVP and GTV-PET was seen in 71% of patients, and complete overlap in 4%. CONCLUSION: PET/pathology image coregistration can be used for evaluation of different imaging modalities. (11)C-Choline PET failed to distinguish tumour from nontumour tissue.
Authors: Michael Souvatzoglou; Gregor Weirich; Sarah Schwarzenboeck; Tobias Maurer; Tibor Schuster; Ralph Alexander Bundschuh; Matthias Eiber; Ken Herrmann; Hubert Kuebler; Hans Juergen Wester; Heinz Hoefler; Juergen Gschwend; Markus Schwaiger; Uwe Treiber; Bernd Joachim Krause Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2011-04-14 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Vijay Shah; Thomas Pohida; Baris Turkbey; Haresh Mani; Maria Merino; Peter A Pinto; Peter Choyke; Marcelino Bernardo Journal: Rev Sci Instrum Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 1.523
Authors: Joe H Chang; Daryl Lim Joon; Sze Ting Lee; Sylvia J Gong; Andrew M Scott; Ian D Davis; David Clouston; Damien Bolton; Christopher S Hamilton; Vincent Khoo Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2011-05-18 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: G Martorana; R Schiavina; B Corti; M Farsad; E Salizzoni; E Brunocilla; A Bertaccini; F Manferrari; P Castellucci; S Fanti; R Canini; W F Grigioni; A D'Errico Grigioni Journal: J Urol Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Sven N Reske; Norbert M Blumstein; Bernd Neumaier; Hans-Werner Gottfried; Frank Finsterbusch; Darius Kocot; Peter Möller; Gerhard Glatting; Sven Perner Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Maria Picchio; Alberto Briganti; Stefano Fanti; Axel Heidenreich; Bernd J Krause; Cristina Messa; Francesco Montorsi; Sven N Reske; George N Thalmann Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2010-09-15 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Ralph A Bundschuh; Christina M Wendl; Gregor Weirich; Mathias Eiber; Michael Souvatzoglou; Uwe Treiber; Hubert Kübler; Tobias Maurer; Jürgen E Gschwend; Hans Geinitz; Anca L Grosu; Sibylle I Ziegler; Bernd Joachim Krause Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2013-02-07 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Baris Turkbey; Esther Mena; Joanna Shih; Peter A Pinto; Maria J Merino; Maria L Lindenberg; Marcelino Bernardo; Yolanda L McKinney; Stephen Adler; Rikard Owenius; Peter L Choyke; Karen A Kurdziel Journal: Radiology Date: 2013-11-08 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Giampiero Giovacchini; Priscilla Guglielmo; Paola Mapelli; Elena Incerti; Ana Maria Samanes Gajate; Elisabetta Giovannini; Mattia Riondato; Alberto Briganti; Luigi Gianolli; Andrea Ciarmiello; Maria Picchio Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2019-01-10 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Constantinos Zamboglou; Gesche Wieser; Steffen Hennies; Irene Rempel; Simon Kirste; Martin Soschynski; Hans Christian Rischke; Tobias Fechter; Cordula A Jilg; Mathias Langer; Philipp T Meyer; Michael Bock; Anca-Ligia Grosu Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-11-23 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Constantinos Zamboglou; Vanessa Drendel; Cordula A Jilg; Hans C Rischke; Teresa I Beck; Wolfgang Schultze-Seemann; Tobias Krauss; Michael Mix; Florian Schiller; Ulrich Wetterauer; Martin Werner; Mathias Langer; Michael Bock; Philipp T Meyer; Anca L Grosu Journal: Theranostics Date: 2017-01-01 Impact factor: 11.556
Authors: F Schiller; T Fechter; C Zamboglou; A Chirindel; N Salman; C A Jilg; V Drendel; M Werner; P T Meyer; A-L Grosu; M Mix Journal: EJNMMI Phys Date: 2017-08-17
Authors: Constantinos Zamboglou; Matthias Eiber; Thomas R Fassbender; Matthias Eder; Simon Kirste; Michael Bock; Oliver Schilling; Kathrin Reichel; Uulke A van der Heide; Anca L Grosu Journal: Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol Date: 2018-11-05