Paul Flechsig1,2, Christina Walker3, Clemens Kratochwil3, Laila König4, Andrei Iagura5, Jan Moltz6, Tim Holland-Letz7, Hans-Ulrich Kauczor8,9, Uwe Haberkorn3,8,10, Frederik L Giesel3,8,10,11. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, INF 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. paul.flechsig@med.uni-heidelberg.de. 2. Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg, Member of the German Center for Lung Research DZL, Heidelberg, Germany. paul.flechsig@med.uni-heidelberg.de. 3. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, INF 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 5. Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. 6. Fraunhofer MEVIS, Institute for Medical Image Computing, Bremen, Germany. 7. Department of Biostatistics, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany. 8. Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg, Member of the German Center for Lung Research DZL, Heidelberg, Germany. 9. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 10. Clinical Cooperation Unit, Department of Nuclear Medicine, DKFZ, Heidelberg, Germany. 11. Department of Radiology, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Medical Centre, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: In patients with Hodgkin (HL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), primary staging, as well as intermediate and late response assessment, is often performed by integrated 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose ([18F]FDG) positron emission tomography/X-ray computed tomography (PET/CT). The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate if findings in patients with histopathologically proven HL or NHL might correlate with semi-automated density measurements of target lesions (TLs) in the CT component of the integrated PET/CT examination. PROCEDURES: After approval by the institutional review board, 176 lymph nodes (LN) in 90 PET/CT examinations of 90 patients were retrospectively analyzed (HL, 108 TLs out of 55 patients; NHL, 68 TLs out of 35 patients). PET/CT was performed for reasons of primary staging, response evaluation as interim PET, or as final examination after therapy, according to the clinical schedule. Analyses of TLs were performed on the basis of tracer uptake (SUV) 60 min after tracer injection and volumetric CT histogram analysis in non-contrast-enhanced CT. RESULTS: All patients were diagnosed with HL or NHL in a pretreatment biopsy. Prior to therapy induction, staging of all patients was performed using contrast-enhanced CT of the neck to the pelvis, or by [18F]FDG PET/CT. Of the 176 TLs, 119 were classified as malignant, and 57 were benign. Malignant TLs had significantly higher CT density values compared to benign (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Density measurements of TLs in patients with HL and NHL correlate with the dignity of TLs and might therefore serve as a complementary surrogate parameter for the differentiation between malignant and benign TLs. A possible density threshold in clinical routine might be a 20-Hounsfield units (HU) cutoff value to rule out benignancy in TLs that are above the 20-HU threshold.
PURPOSE: In patients with Hodgkin (HL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), primary staging, as well as intermediate and late response assessment, is often performed by integrated 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose ([18F]FDG) positron emission tomography/X-ray computed tomography (PET/CT). The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate if findings in patients with histopathologically proven HL or NHL might correlate with semi-automated density measurements of target lesions (TLs) in the CT component of the integrated PET/CT examination. PROCEDURES: After approval by the institutional review board, 176 lymph nodes (LN) in 90 PET/CT examinations of 90 patients were retrospectively analyzed (HL, 108 TLs out of 55 patients; NHL, 68 TLs out of 35 patients). PET/CT was performed for reasons of primary staging, response evaluation as interim PET, or as final examination after therapy, according to the clinical schedule. Analyses of TLs were performed on the basis of tracer uptake (SUV) 60 min after tracer injection and volumetric CT histogram analysis in non-contrast-enhanced CT. RESULTS: All patients were diagnosed with HL or NHL in a pretreatment biopsy. Prior to therapy induction, staging of all patients was performed using contrast-enhanced CT of the neck to the pelvis, or by [18F]FDG PET/CT. Of the 176 TLs, 119 were classified as malignant, and 57 were benign. Malignant TLs had significantly higher CT density values compared to benign (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Density measurements of TLs in patients with HL and NHL correlate with the dignity of TLs and might therefore serve as a complementary surrogate parameter for the differentiation between malignant and benign TLs. A possible density threshold in clinical routine might be a 20-Hounsfield units (HU) cutoff value to rule out benignancy in TLs that are above the 20-HU threshold.
Authors: Michael Puesken; Boris Buerke; Joachim Gerss; Barbara Frisch; Florian Beyer; Matthias Weckesser; Harald Seifarth; Walter Heindel; Johannes Wessling Journal: J Comput Assist Tomogr Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 1.826
Authors: Sally F Barrington; Wendi Qian; Edward J Somer; Antonella Franceschetto; Bruno Bagni; Eva Brun; Helén Almquist; Annika Loft; Liselotte Højgaard; Massimo Federico; Andrea Gallamini; Paul Smith; Peter Johnson; John Radford; Michael J O'Doherty Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2010-05-27 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Paul Flechsig; Peter Choyke; Clemens Kratochwil; Arne Warth; Gerald Antoch; Tim Holland Letz; Daniel Rath; Viktoria Eichwald; Peter E Huber; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Uwe Haberkorn; Frederik L Giesel Journal: Diagn Interv Radiol Date: 2016 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.630
Authors: Paul Flechsig; Christian M Zechmann; Julian Schreiweis; Clemens Kratochwil; Daniel Rath; Lawrence H Schwartz; Heinz-Peter Schlemmer; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Uwe Haberkorn; Frederik L Giesel Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2015-05-08 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: F L Giesel; C Kratochwil; A Mehndiratta; S Wulfert; J H Moltz; C M Zechmann; H U Kauczor; U Haberkorn; S Ley Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2012-01-10 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Philippe Lambin; Emmanuel Rios-Velazquez; Ralph Leijenaar; Sara Carvalho; Ruud G P M van Stiphout; Patrick Granton; Catharina M L Zegers; Robert Gillies; Ronald Boellard; André Dekker; Hugo J W L Aerts Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2012-01-16 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Torben Haugaard Jensen; Martin Bech; Tina Binderup; Arvid Böttiger; Christian David; Timm Weitkamp; Irene Zanette; Elena Reznikova; Jürgen Mohr; Fritz Rank; Robert Feidenhans'l; Andreas Kjær; Liselotte Højgaard; Franz Pfeiffer Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-01-18 Impact factor: 3.240