OBJECTIVE: To investigate reproducibility of fluorine-18 fludeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) uptake on (18)F-FDG positron emission tomography (PET)/CT and (18)F-FDG PET/MR scans in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). METHODS: 30 patients with HNSCC were included in this prospective study. The patients were scanned twice before radiotherapy treatment with both PET/CT and PET/MR. Patients were scanned on the same scanners, 3 days apart and according to the same protocol. Metabolic tumour activity was measured by the maximum and peak standardized uptake value (SUVmax and SUVpeak, respectively), and total lesion glycolysis from the metabolic tumour volume defined from ≥50% SUVmax. Bland-Altman analysis with limits of agreement, coefficient of variation (CV) from the two modalities were performed in order to test the reproducibility. Furthermore, CVs from SUVmax and SUVpeak were compared. The area under the curve from cumulative SUV-volume histograms were measured and tested for reproducibility of the distribution of (18)F-FDG uptake. RESULTS: 24 patients had two pre-treatment PET/CT scans and 21 patients had two pre-treatment PET/MR scans available for further analyses. Mean difference for SUVmax, peak and mean was approximately 4% for PET/CT and 3% for PET/MR, with 95% limits of agreement less than ±20%. CV was small (5-7%) for both modalities. There was no significant difference in CVs between PET/CT and PET/MR (p = 0.31). SUVmax was not more reproducible than SUVpeak (p = 0.09). CONCLUSION: (18)F-FDG uptake in PET/CT and PET/MR is highly reproducible and we found no difference in reproducibility between PET/CT and PET/MR. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is the first report to test reproducibility of PET/CT and PET/MR.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate reproducibility of fluorine-18 fludeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) uptake on (18)F-FDG positron emission tomography (PET)/CT and (18)F-FDG PET/MR scans in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). METHODS: 30 patients with HNSCC were included in this prospective study. The patients were scanned twice before radiotherapy treatment with both PET/CT and PET/MR. Patients were scanned on the same scanners, 3 days apart and according to the same protocol. Metabolic tumour activity was measured by the maximum and peak standardized uptake value (SUVmax and SUVpeak, respectively), and total lesion glycolysis from the metabolic tumour volume defined from ≥50% SUVmax. Bland-Altman analysis with limits of agreement, coefficient of variation (CV) from the two modalities were performed in order to test the reproducibility. Furthermore, CVs from SUVmax and SUVpeak were compared. The area under the curve from cumulative SUV-volume histograms were measured and tested for reproducibility of the distribution of (18)F-FDG uptake. RESULTS: 24 patients had two pre-treatment PET/CT scans and 21 patients had two pre-treatment PET/MR scans available for further analyses. Mean difference for SUVmax, peak and mean was approximately 4% for PET/CT and 3% for PET/MR, with 95% limits of agreement less than ±20%. CV was small (5-7%) for both modalities. There was no significant difference in CVs between PET/CT and PET/MR (p = 0.31). SUVmax was not more reproducible than SUVpeak (p = 0.09). CONCLUSION: (18)F-FDG uptake in PET/CT and PET/MR is highly reproducible and we found no difference in reproducibility between PET/CT and PET/MR. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is the first report to test reproducibility of PET/CT and PET/MR.
Authors: Jeong Won Lee; Arthur Cho; Jae-Hoon Lee; Mijin Yun; Jong Doo Lee; Young Tae Kim; Won Jun Kang Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2014-05-23 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Cristina Lois; Bjoern W Jakoby; Misty J Long; Karl F Hubner; David W Barker; Michael E Casey; Maurizio Conti; Vladimir Y Panin; Dan J Kadrmas; David W Townsend Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2010-01-15 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Jacob H Rasmussen; Ivan R Vogelius; Barbara M Fischer; Jeppe Friborg; Marianne C Aznar; Gitte F Persson; Katrin Håkansson; Claus A Kristensen; Søren M Bentzen; Lena Specht Journal: Head Neck Date: 2014-07-21 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: Andrea G Rockall; Norbert Avril; Raymond Lam; Robert Iannone; P David Mozley; Christine Parkinson; Donald Bergstrom; Evis Sala; Shah-Jalal Sarker; Iain A McNeish; James D Brenton Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2014-02-26 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Arthur Varoquaux; Olivier Rager; Antoine Poncet; Bénédicte M A Delattre; Osman Ratib; Christoph D Becker; Pavel Dulguerov; Nicolas Dulguerov; Habib Zaidi; Minerva Becker Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2013-10-10 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Jorianne Boers; Erik F J de Vries; Andor W J M Glaudemans; Geke A P Hospers; Carolina P Schröder Journal: Curr Oncol Rep Date: 2020-07-06 Impact factor: 5.075
Authors: Tyler J Fraum; Kathryn J Fowler; John P Crandall; Richard A Laforest; Amber Salter; Hongyu An; Michael A Jacobs; Perry W Grigsby; Farrokh Dehdashti; Richard L Wahl Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2019-02-07 Impact factor: 10.057