A Study on the Basic Criteria for Selecting Heterogeneity Parameters of F18-FDG PET Images

Textural analysis might give new insights into the quantitative characterization of metabolically active tumors. More than thirty textural parameters have been investigated in former F18-FDG studies already. The purpose of the paper is to declare basic requirements as a selection strategy to identify the most appropriate heterogeneity parameters to measure textural features. Our predefined requirements were: a reliable heterogeneity parameter has to be volume independent, reproducible, and suitable for expressing quantitatively the degree of heterogeneity. Based on this criteria, we compared various suggested measures of homogeneity. A homogeneous cylindrical phantom was measured on three different PET/CT scanners using the commonly used protocol. In addition, a custom-made inhomogeneous tumor insert placed into the NEMA image quality phantom was imaged with a set of acquisition times and several different reconstruction protocols. PET data of 65 patients with proven lung lesions were retrospectively analyzed as well. Four heterogeneity parameters out of 27 were found as the most attractive ones to characterize the textural properties of metabolically active tumors in FDG PET images. These four parameters included Entropy, Contrast, Correlation, and Coefficient of Variation. These parameters were independent of delineated tumor volume (bigger than 25–30 ml), provided reproducible values (relative standard deviation< 10%), and showed high sensitivity to changes in heterogeneity. Phantom measurements are a viable way to test the reliability of heterogeneity parameters that would be of interest to nuclear imaging clinicians.

[1]  M. Soussan,et al.  Relationship between Tumor Heterogeneity Measured on FDG-PET/CT and Pathological Prognostic Factors in Invasive Breast Cancer , 2014, PloS one.

[2]  Current measures of metabolic heterogeneity within cervical cancer do not predict disease outcome , 2011, Radiation oncology.

[3]  Fei Yang,et al.  Quantitative radiomics: impact of stochastic effects on textural feature analysis implies the need for standards , 2015, Journal of medical imaging.

[4]  M. Hatt,et al.  Intratumor Heterogeneity Characterized by Textural Features on Baseline 18F-FDG PET Images Predicts Response to Concomitant Radiochemotherapy in Esophageal Cancer , 2011, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[5]  P. Lambin,et al.  Decoding tumour phenotype by noninvasive imaging using a quantitative radiomics approach , 2014, Nature Communications.

[6]  R. Jeraj,et al.  Variability of textural features in FDG PET images due to different acquisition modes and reconstruction parameters , 2010, Acta oncologica.

[7]  Vicky Goh,et al.  Correlation of Intra-Tumor 18F-FDG Uptake Heterogeneity Indices with Perfusion CT Derived Parameters in Colorectal Cancer , 2014, PloS one.

[8]  Bal Sanghera,et al.  Assessment of tumor heterogeneity: an emerging imaging tool for clinical practice? , 2012, Insights into Imaging.

[9]  Vicky Goh,et al.  Quantifying tumour heterogeneity in 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging by texture analysis , 2012, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[10]  D. Townsend,et al.  Impact of Image Reconstruction Settings on Texture Features in 18F-FDG PET , 2015, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[11]  W. Niessen,et al.  Quantification of Heterogeneity as a Biomarker in Tumor Imaging: A Systematic Review , 2014, PloS one.

[12]  Frank J. Brooks,et al.  Quantification of heterogeneity observed in medical images , 2013, BMC Medical Imaging.

[13]  M Schwaiger,et al.  Reproducibility of metabolic measurements in malignant tumors using FDG PET. , 1999, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[14]  David L. Schwartz,et al.  Tumor Hypoxia Imaging with [F-18] Fluoromisonidazole Positron Emission Tomography in Head and Neck Cancer , 2006, Clinical Cancer Research.

[15]  F. Brooks,et al.  FDG uptake heterogeneity in FIGO IIb cervical carcinoma does not predict pelvic lymph node involvement , 2013, Radiation oncology.

[16]  M. Hatt,et al.  18F-FDG PET Uptake Characterization Through Texture Analysis: Investigating the Complementary Nature of Heterogeneity and Functional Tumor Volume in a Multi–Cancer Site Patient Cohort , 2015, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[17]  M. Hatt,et al.  Robustness of intratumour 18F-FDG PET uptake heterogeneity quantification for therapy response prediction in oesophageal carcinoma , 2013, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[18]  Xin Lu,et al.  Hypoxia and Hypoxia-Inducible Factors: Master Regulators of Metastasis , 2010, Clinical Cancer Research.

[19]  F. Brooks,et al.  The Effect of Small Tumor Volumes on Studies of Intratumoral Heterogeneity of Tracer Uptake , 2014, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[20]  Vicky Goh,et al.  Are Pretreatment 18F-FDG PET Tumor Textural Features in Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer Associated with Response and Survival After Chemoradiotherapy? , 2013, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[21]  Robert J. Gillies,et al.  The effect of SUV discretization in quantitative FDG-PET Radiomics: the need for standardized methodology in tumor texture analysis , 2015, Scientific Reports.

[22]  M. Schwaiger,et al.  Textural Parameters of Tumor Heterogeneity in 18F-FDG PET/CT for Therapy Response Assessment and Prognosis in Patients with Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer , 2014, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[23]  N. Thacker,et al.  Quantifying heterogeneity in human tumours using MRI and PET. , 2012, European journal of cancer.

[24]  Peter Bartenstein,et al.  Overexpression of Glut‐1 and increased glucose metabolism in tumors are associated with a poor prognosis in patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma , 2003, Cancer.

[25]  Irène Buvat,et al.  Tumor Texture Analysis in PET: Where Do We Stand? , 2015, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[26]  Florent Tixier,et al.  Robustness of intratumour 18 F-FDG PET uptake heterogeneity quantification for therapy response prediction in ooesophageal carcinoma , 2017 .

[27]  Dimitris Visvikis,et al.  Reproducibility of 18F-FDG and 3′-Deoxy-3′-18F-Fluorothymidine PET Tumor Volume Measurements , 2010, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[28]  Florent Tixier,et al.  Visual Versus Quantitative Assessment of Intratumor 18F-FDG PET Uptake Heterogeneity: Prognostic Value in Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer , 2014, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[29]  Frank J. Brooks,et al.  On some misconceptions about tumor heterogeneity quantification , 2013, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[30]  M. Soussan,et al.  18F-FDG PET-Derived Textural Indices Reflect Tissue-Specific Uptake Pattern in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer , 2015, PloS one.

[31]  Chun-Ta Liao,et al.  Textural Features of Pretreatment 18F-FDG PET/CT Images: Prognostic Significance in Patients with Advanced T-Stage Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma , 2013, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[32]  Claude Nahmias,et al.  Reproducibility of Standardized Uptake Value Measurements Determined by 18F-FDG PET in Malignant Tumors , 2008, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[33]  Yong Yin,et al.  Three-dimensional positron emission tomography image texture analysis of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: relationship between tumor 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake heterogeneity, maximum standardized uptake value, and tumor stage , 2013, Nuclear medicine communications.

[34]  Perry W. Grigsby,et al.  Temporal analysis of intratumoral metabolic heterogeneity characterized by textural features in cervical cancer , 2013, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[35]  Dimitris Visvikis,et al.  Characterization of PET/CT images using texture analysis: the past, the present… any future? , 2016, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[36]  Paul Kinahan,et al.  Positron emission tomography-computed tomography standardized uptake values in clinical practice and assessing response to therapy. , 2010, Seminars in ultrasound, CT, and MR.

[37]  Charles Laymon,et al.  Quantifying Metabolic Heterogeneity in Head and Neck Tumors in Real Time: 2-DG Uptake Is Highest in Hypoxic Tumor Regions , 2014, PloS one.

[38]  Irène Buvat,et al.  Tumor Texture Analysis in 18F-FDG PET: Relationships Between Texture Parameters, Histogram Indices, Standardized Uptake Values, Metabolic Volumes, and Total Lesion Glycolysis , 2014, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[39]  Ronald Boellaard,et al.  Repeatability of Metabolically Active Volume Measurements with 18F-FDG and 18F-FLT PET in Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer , 2010, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[40]  Masayuki Sasaki,et al.  FDG uptake heterogeneity evaluated by fractal analysis improves the differential diagnosis of pulmonary nodules. , 2014, European journal of radiology.