Literature DB >> 8683318

Simplified measurement of deoxyglucose utilization rate.

G J Hunter1, L M Hamberg, N M Alpert, N C Choi, A J Fischman.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: The reliability of the dose uptake ratio (DUR), a widely used index of 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (18FDG) metabolism in a variety of tumors, depends on the overall rate of removal of 18FDG from the circulation. Correcting for this factor is important if DUR is to be used quantitatively for pre- and post-treatment assessments of tumors.
METHODS: We developed a simplified kinetic method (SKM), based on measured blood curves from a control group, which requires one venous blood sample. We compared the simplified method to the conventional kinetic method and the widely used DUR index in 13 patients with grade 3 or 4 non-small-cell lung carcinoma. Studies were obtained before and after treatment. In all patients, dynamic PET imaging and blood activity measurement was performed for 80 min. The utilization rate of 18FDG (MRDGlc) was calculated by using a three-compartment model and correlated with a 55-min measurement of DUR and with the simplified kinetic method.
RESULTS: Coefficients of determination (R2) between MRDGlc and DUR before and after treatment were 0.53 and 0.71, respectively. Using the SKM, these values improved significantly (p < 0.0001) to 0.96 and 0.94, respectively. The pooled pre- and post-treatment coefficient of determination for DUR versus MRDGlc was 0.81; for SKM, it improved significantly (p < 0.001) to 0.98.
CONCLUSION: These results indicate that the observed tumor tissue uptake of 18FDG, corrected for blood 18FDG activity and glucose concentration, can reliably predict glucose metabolic rate from a single static image acquired at between 45 min and 1 hr after injection. This has substantial implications for the quantitative use of 18FDG PET to diagnose and manage malignancy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8683318

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nucl Med        ISSN: 0161-5505            Impact factor:   10.057


  47 in total

1.  Is quantitation necessary for oncological PET studies? Against.

Authors:  Michael M Graham
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 2.  Measuring response to chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer: methodological considerations.

Authors:  Nanda C Krak; Otto S Hoekstra; Adriaan A Lammertsma
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2004-04-22       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  An open tool for input function estimation and quantification of dynamic PET FDG brain scans.

Authors:  Martín Bertrán; Natalia Martínez; Guillermo Carbajal; Alicia Fernández; Álvaro Gómez
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2015-10-29       Impact factor: 2.924

4.  Effects of ROI definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial.

Authors:  Nanda C Krak; R Boellaard; Otto S Hoekstra; Jos W R Twisk; Corneline J Hoekstra; Adriaan A Lammertsma
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2004-10-15       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 5.  How should we analyse FDG PET studies for monitoring tumour response?

Authors:  Adriaan A Lammertsma; Corneline J Hoekstra; Giuseppe Giaccone; Otto S Hoekstra
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 9.236

6.  Image-derived input function for assessment of 18F-FDG uptake by the inflamed lung.

Authors:  Tobias Schroeder; Marcos F Vidal Melo; Guido Musch; R Scott Harris; Jose G Venegas; Tilo Winkler
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2007-10-17       Impact factor: 10.057

7.  PET/CT fusion viewing software for use with picture archiving and communication systems.

Authors:  Ki Chun Im; Ik Soo Choi; Jin-Sook Ryu; Gi Seoung Eo; Jae Seung Kim; Dae Hyuk Moon
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2009-08-06       Impact factor: 4.056

8.  Dose-dependent effects of the CRF(1) receptor antagonist R317573 on regional brain activity in healthy male subjects.

Authors:  Mark E Schmidt; Randolph D Andrews; Peter van der Ark; Terry Brown; Erik Mannaert; Thomas Steckler; Jan de Hoon; Koen Van Laere
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2009-11-13       Impact factor: 4.530

9.  Measuring [(18)F]FDG uptake in breast cancer during chemotherapy: comparison of analytical methods.

Authors:  Nanda C Krak; Jacobus J M van der Hoeven; Otto S Hoekstra; Jos W R Twisk; Elsken van der Wall; Adriaan A Lammertsma
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2003-03-15       Impact factor: 9.236

10.  Sleep-Wake Differences in Relative Regional Cerebral Metabolic Rate for Glucose among Patients with Insomnia Compared with Good Sleepers.

Authors:  Daniel B Kay; Helmet T Karim; Adriane M Soehner; Brant P Hasler; Kristine A Wilckens; Jeffrey A James; Howard J Aizenstein; Julie C Price; Bedda L Rosario; David J Kupfer; Anne Germain; Martica H Hall; Peter L Franzen; Eric A Nofzinger; Daniel J Buysse
Journal:  Sleep       Date:  2016-10-01       Impact factor: 5.849

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.