Michael Messerli1,2,3, Urs J Muehlematter1,3,4, Saskia Fassbind1,3, Daniel Franzen3,5, Daniela A Ferraro1, Martin W Huellner1,3, Valerie Treyer1,3, Alessandra Curioni-Fontecedro3,6, Irene A Burger1,3,7. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. 2. Maastricht UMC+, Heart and Vascular Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands. 3. University of Zurich (UZH), Zurich, Switzerland. 4. Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. 5. Department of Pulmonary Medicine, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. 6. Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. 7. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Kantonsspital Baden, Baden, Switzerland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the potential of automatic lung cancer detection on submillisievert dose 18F-fludeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) scans using different positron emission tomography (PET) parameters, as a primary step towards a potential new indication for 18F-FDG PET in lung cancer screening. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort analysis with 83 patients referred for 18F-FDG PET/CT, including of 34 patients with histology-proven lung cancer and 49 patients without lung disease. Aside clinical standard PET images (PET100%) two additional low-dose PET reconstructions were generated, using only 15 s and 5 s of the 150 s list mode raw data of the full-dose PET, corresponding to 10% and 3.3% of the original 18F-FDG activity. The lungs were subdivided into three segments on each side, and each segment was classified as normal or containing cancer. The following standardized uptake values (SUVs) were extracted from PET per lung segment: SUVmean, SUVhot5, SUVmedian, SUVstd and SUVtotal. A multivariate linear regression model was used and cross-validated. The accuracy for lung cancer detection was tested with receiver operating characteristics analysis and T-statistics was used to calculate the weight of each parameter. RESULTS: The T-statistics showed that SUVstd was the most important discriminative factor for lung cancer detection. The multivariate model achieved an area under the curve of 0.97 for full-dose PET, 0.85 for PET10% with PET3.3% reconstructions resulting in a still high sensitivity the PET10% reconstruction of 80%. CONCLUSION: This pilot study indicates that segment-based, quantitative PET parameters of low-dose PET reconstructions could be used to automatically detect lung cancer with high sensitivity. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Automated assessment of PET parameters in low-dose PET may aid for an early detection of lung cancer.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the potential of automatic lung cancer detection on submillisievert dose 18F-fludeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) scans using different positron emission tomography (PET) parameters, as a primary step towards a potential new indication for 18F-FDG PET in lung cancer screening. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort analysis with 83 patients referred for 18F-FDG PET/CT, including of 34 patients with histology-proven lung cancer and 49 patients without lung disease. Aside clinical standard PET images (PET100%) two additional low-dose PET reconstructions were generated, using only 15 s and 5 s of the 150 s list mode raw data of the full-dose PET, corresponding to 10% and 3.3% of the original 18F-FDG activity. The lungs were subdivided into three segments on each side, and each segment was classified as normal or containing cancer. The following standardized uptake values (SUVs) were extracted from PET per lung segment: SUVmean, SUVhot5, SUVmedian, SUVstd and SUVtotal. A multivariate linear regression model was used and cross-validated. The accuracy for lung cancer detection was tested with receiver operating characteristics analysis and T-statistics was used to calculate the weight of each parameter. RESULTS: The T-statistics showed that SUVstd was the most important discriminative factor for lung cancer detection. The multivariate model achieved an area under the curve of 0.97 for full-dose PET, 0.85 for PET10% with PET3.3% reconstructions resulting in a still high sensitivity the PET10% reconstruction of 80%. CONCLUSION: This pilot study indicates that segment-based, quantitative PET parameters of low-dose PET reconstructions could be used to automatically detect lung cancer with high sensitivity. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Automated assessment of PET parameters in low-dose PET may aid for an early detection of lung cancer.
Authors: Jared A Christensen; Mark A Nathan; Brian P Mullan; Thomas E Hartman; Stephen J Swensen; Val J Lowe Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Joshua D Schaefferkoetter; Jianhua Yan; Therese Sjöholm; David W Townsend; Maurizio Conti; John Kit Chung Tam; Ross A Soo; Ivan Tham Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2016-09-29 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Annette McWilliams; Martin C Tammemagi; John R Mayo; Heidi Roberts; Geoffrey Liu; Kam Soghrati; Kazuhiro Yasufuku; Simon Martel; Francis Laberge; Michel Gingras; Sukhinder Atkar-Khattra; Christine D Berg; Ken Evans; Richard Finley; John Yee; John English; Paola Nasute; John Goffin; Serge Puksa; Lori Stewart; Scott Tsai; Michael R Johnston; Daria Manos; Garth Nicholas; Glenwood D Goss; Jean M Seely; Kayvan Amjadi; Alain Tremblay; Paul Burrowes; Paul MacEachern; Rick Bhatia; Ming-Sound Tsao; Stephen Lam Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-09-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Denise R Aberle; Amanda M Adams; Christine D Berg; William C Black; Jonathan D Clapp; Richard M Fagerstrom; Ilana F Gareen; Constantine Gatsonis; Pamela M Marcus; JoRean D Sicks Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-06-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Harry J de Koning; Carlijn M van der Aalst; Pim A de Jong; Ernst T Scholten; Kristiaan Nackaerts; Marjolein A Heuvelmans; Jan-Willem J Lammers; Carla Weenink; Uraujh Yousaf-Khan; Nanda Horeweg; Susan van 't Westeinde; Mathias Prokop; Willem P Mali; Firdaus A A Mohamed Hoesein; Peter M A van Ooijen; Joachim G J V Aerts; Michael A den Bakker; Erik Thunnissen; Johny Verschakelen; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Joan E Walter; Kevin Ten Haaf; Harry J M Groen; Matthijs Oudkerk Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2020-01-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Didier Lardinois; Walter Weder; Thomas F Hany; Ehab M Kamel; Stephan Korom; Burkhardt Seifert; Gustav K von Schulthess; Hans C Steinert Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-06-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michael Messerli; Thomas Kluckert; Meinhard Knitel; Stephan Wälti; Lotus Desbiolles; Fabian Rengier; René Warschkow; Ralf W Bauer; Hatem Alkadhi; Sebastian Leschka; Simon Wildermuth Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-01-16 Impact factor: 5.315