Wolfgang A Weber1, Constantine A Gatsonis2, P David Mozley3, Lucy G Hanna2, Anthony F Shields4, Denise R Aberle5, Ramaswamy Govindan6, Drew A Torigian7, Joel S Karp7, Jian Q Michael Yu8, Rathan M Subramaniam9, Robert A Halvorsen10, Barry A Siegel. 1. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York weberw@mskcc.org. 2. Department of Biostatistics and Center for Statistical Sciences, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island. 3. Merck & Co., Whitehouse Station, New Jersey. 4. Karmanos Cancer Institute, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan. 5. University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California. 6. Division of Oncology and the Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri. 7. Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 8. Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 9. Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science and Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland. 10. Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia; and.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: PET/CT with the glucose analog (18)F-FDG has several potential applications for monitoring tumor response to therapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A prerequisite for many of these applications is detailed knowledge of the repeatability of quantitative parameters derived from (18)F-FDG PET/CT studies. METHODS: The repeatability of the (18)F-FDG signal was evaluated in 2 prospective multicenter trials. Patients with advanced NSCLC (tumor stage III-IV) underwent two (18)F-FDG PET/CT studies while not receiving therapy. Tumor (18)F-FDG uptake was quantified by measurement of the maximum standardized uptake value within a lesion (SUVmax) and the average SUV within a small volume of interest around the site of maximum uptake (SUVpeak). Analysis was performed for the lesion in the chest with the highest (18)F-FDG uptake and a size of at least 2 cm (target lesion) as well as for up to 6 additional lesions per patient. Repeatability was assessed by Bland-Altman plots and calculation of 95% repeatability coefficients (RCs) of the log-transformed SUV differences. RESULTS: Test-retest repeatability was assessed in 74 patients (34 from the ACRIN 6678 trial and 40 from the Merck MK-0646-008 trial). SUVpeak was 11.57 ± 7.89 g/mL for the ACRIN trial and 6.89 ± 3.02 for the Merck trial. The lower and upper RCs were -28% (95% confidence interval [CI], -35% to -23%) and +39% (95% CI, 31% to 54%) in the ACRIN trial, indicating that a decrease of SUVpeak by more than 28% or an increase by more than 39% has a probability of less than 2.5%. The corresponding RCs from the Merck trial were -35% (95% CI, -42% to -29%) and +53% (95% CI, 41% to 72%). Repeatability was similar for SUVmax of the target lesion, averaged SUVmax, and averaged SUVpeak of up to 6 lesions per patient. CONCLUSION: The variability of repeated measurements of tumor (18)F-FDG uptake in patients with NSCLC is somewhat larger than previously reported in smaller single-center studies but comparable to that of gastrointestinal malignancies in a previous multicenter trial. The variability of measurements supports the definitions of tumor response according to PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors.
UNLABELLED: PET/CT with the glucose analog (18)F-FDG has several potential applications for monitoring tumor response to therapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A prerequisite for many of these applications is detailed knowledge of the repeatability of quantitative parameters derived from (18)F-FDG PET/CT studies. METHODS: The repeatability of the (18)F-FDG signal was evaluated in 2 prospective multicenter trials. Patients with advanced NSCLC (tumor stage III-IV) underwent two (18)F-FDG PET/CT studies while not receiving therapy. Tumor (18)F-FDG uptake was quantified by measurement of the maximum standardized uptake value within a lesion (SUVmax) and the average SUV within a small volume of interest around the site of maximum uptake (SUVpeak). Analysis was performed for the lesion in the chest with the highest (18)F-FDG uptake and a size of at least 2 cm (target lesion) as well as for up to 6 additional lesions per patient. Repeatability was assessed by Bland-Altman plots and calculation of 95% repeatability coefficients (RCs) of the log-transformed SUV differences. RESULTS: Test-retest repeatability was assessed in 74 patients (34 from the ACRIN 6678 trial and 40 from the Merck MK-0646-008 trial). SUVpeak was 11.57 ± 7.89 g/mL for the ACRIN trial and 6.89 ± 3.02 for the Merck trial. The lower and upper RCs were -28% (95% confidence interval [CI], -35% to -23%) and +39% (95% CI, 31% to 54%) in the ACRIN trial, indicating that a decrease of SUVpeak by more than 28% or an increase by more than 39% has a probability of less than 2.5%. The corresponding RCs from the Merck trial were -35% (95% CI, -42% to -29%) and +53% (95% CI, 41% to 72%). Repeatability was similar for SUVmax of the target lesion, averaged SUVmax, and averaged SUVpeak of up to 6 lesions per patient. CONCLUSION: The variability of repeated measurements of tumor (18)F-FDG uptake in patients with NSCLC is somewhat larger than previously reported in smaller single-center studies but comparable to that of gastrointestinal malignancies in a previous multicenter trial. The variability of measurements supports the definitions of tumor response according to PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors.
Authors: P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-02-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Lalitha K Shankar; John M Hoffman; Steve Bacharach; Michael M Graham; Joel Karp; Adriaan A Lammertsma; Steven Larson; David A Mankoff; Barry A Siegel; Annick Van den Abbeele; Jeffrey Yap; Daniel Sullivan Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Joan H Schiller; David Harrington; Chandra P Belani; Corey Langer; Alan Sandler; James Krook; Junming Zhu; David H Johnson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-01-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Corneline J Hoekstra; Otto S Hoekstra; Sigrid G Stroobants; Johan Vansteenkiste; Johan Nuyts; Egbert F Smit; Maarten Boers; Jos W R Twisk; Adriaan A Lammertsma Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Hebert Alberto Vargas; Gem M Kramer; Andrew M Scott; Andrew Weickhardt; Andreas A Meier; Nicole Parada; Bradley J Beattie; John L Humm; Kevin D Staton; Pat B Zanzonico; Serge K Lyashchenko; Jason S Lewis; Maqsood Yaqub; Ramon E Sosa; Alfons J van den Eertwegh; Ian D Davis; Uwe Ackermann; Kunthi Pathmaraj; Robert C Schuit; Albert D Windhorst; Sue Chua; Wolfgang A Weber; Steven M Larson; Howard I Scher; Adriaan A Lammertsma; Otto S Hoekstra; Michael J Morris Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2018-04-06 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Karine Sahakyan; Xin Li; Martin A Lodge; Rudolf A Werner; Ralph A Bundschuh; Lena Bundschuh; Harshad R Kulkarni; Christiane Schuchardt; Richard P Baum; Kenneth J Pienta; Martin G Pomper; Ashley E Ross; Michael A Gorin; Steven P Rowe Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Joseph R Osborne; Teja M Kalidindi; Blesida J Punzalan; Kishore Gangangari; Daniel E Spratt; Wolfgang A Weber; Steven M Larson; Naga Vara Kishore Pillarsetty Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Christie Lin; Tyler Bradshaw; Timothy Perk; Stephanie Harmon; Jens Eickhoff; Ngoneh Jallow; Peter L Choyke; William L Dahut; Steven Larson; John Laurence Humm; Scott Perlman; Andrea B Apolo; Michael J Morris; Glenn Liu; Robert Jeraj Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2016-07-21 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Kong Y Chen; Aaron M Cypess; Maren R Laughlin; Carol R Haft; Houchun Harry Hu; Miriam A Bredella; Sven Enerbäck; Paul E Kinahan; Wouter van Marken Lichtenbelt; Frank I Lin; John J Sunderland; Kirsi A Virtanen; Richard L Wahl Journal: Cell Metab Date: 2016-08-09 Impact factor: 27.287