SU-D-9A-02: Relative Effects of Threshold Choice and Spatial Resolution Modeling On SUV and Volume Quantification in F18-FDG PET Imaging of Anal Cancer Patients.


Journal Article

PURPOSE: PET imaging with F18-FDG is utilized for treatment planning, treatment assessment, and prognosis. A region of interest (ROI) encompassing the tumor may be determined on the PET image, often by a threshold T on the PET standard uptake values (SUVs). Several studies have shown prognostic value for relevant ROI properties including maximum SUV value (SUVmax), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), and total glycolytic activity (TGA). The choice of threshold T may affect mean SUV value (SUVmean), MTV, and TGA. Recently spatial resolution modeling (SRM) has been introduced on many PET systems. SRM may also affect these ROI properties. The purpose of this work is to investigate the relative influence of SRM and threshold choice T on SUVmean, MTV, TGA, and SUVmax. METHODS: For 9 anal cancer patients, 18F-FDG PET scans were performed prior to treatment. PET images were reconstructed by 2 iterations of Ordered Subsets Expectation Maximization (OSEM), with and without SRM. ROI contours were generated by 5 different SUV threshold values T: 2.5, 3.0, 30%, 40%, and 50% of SUVmax. Paired-samples t tests were used to compare SUVmean, MTV, and TGA (a) for SRM on versus off and (b) between each pair of threshold values T. SUVmax was also compared for SRM on versus off. RESULTS: For almost all (57/60) comparisons of 2 different threshold values, SUVmean, MTV, and TGA showed statistically significant variation. For comparison of SRM on versus off, there were no statistically significant changes in SUVmax and TGA, but there were statistically significant changes in MTV for T=2.5 and T=3.0 and in SUVmean for all T. CONCLUSION: The near-universal statistical significance of threshold choice T suggests that, regarding harmonization across sites, threshold choice may be a greater concern than choice of SRM. However, broader study is warranted, e.g. other iterations of OSEM should be considered.

Full Text

Duke Authors

Cited Authors

  • Zhao, F; Bowsher, J; Palta, M; Czito, B; Willett, C; Yin, F

Published Date

  • June 2014

Published In

Volume / Issue

  • 41 / 6

Start / End Page

  • 122 -

PubMed ID

  • 28037253

Pubmed Central ID

  • 28037253

International Standard Serial Number (ISSN)

  • 0094-2405

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.1118/1.4887918


  • eng

Conference Location

  • United States