A Semi-Automated Technique Determining the Liver Standardized Uptake Value Reference for Tumor Delineation in FDG PET-CT

Background 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)-computed tomography (CT) has been an essential modality in oncology. We propose a semi-automated algorithm to objectively determine liver standardized uptake value (SUV), which is used as a threshold for tumor delineation. Methods A large spherical volume of interest (VOI) was placed manually to roughly enclose the right lobe (RL) of the liver. For each voxel in this VOI, a coefficient of variation of voxel values (CVv) was calculated for neighboring voxels within a radius of d/2. The voxel with the minimum CVv was then selected, where a 30-mm spherical VOI was placed at that voxel in accordance with PERCIST criteria. Two nuclear medicine physicians independently defined 30-mm VOIs manually on 124 studies in 62 patients to generate the standard values, against which the results from the new method were compared. Results The semi-automated method was successful in determining the liver SUV that was consistent between the two physicians in all the studies (d = 80 mm). The liver SUV threshold (mean +3 SD within 30-mm VOI) determined by the new semi-automated method (3.12±0.61) was not statistically different from those determined by the manual method (Physician-1: 3.14±0.58, Physician-2: 3.15±0.58). The semi-automated method produced tumor volumes that were not statistically different from those by experts' manual operation. Furthermore, the volume change in the two sequential studies had no statistical difference between semi-automated and manual methods. Conclusions Our semi-automated method could define the liver SUV robustly as the threshold value used for tumor volume measurements according to PERCIST. The method could avoid possible subjective bias of manual liver VOI placement and is thus expected to improve clinical performance of volume-based parameters for prediction of cancer treatment response.

[1]  S. Ben-Haim,et al.  18F-FDG PET and PET/CT in the Evaluation of Cancer Treatment Response* , 2008, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[2]  S. Yang,et al.  Use of pretreatment metabolic tumour volumes to predict the outcome of pharyngeal cancer treated by definitive radiotherapy , 2012, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[3]  P. Grigsby,et al.  Changes in cervical cancer FDG uptake during chemoradiation and association with response. , 2013, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[4]  B. C. Penney,et al.  Prognostic value of metabolic tumor burden from (18)F-FDG PET in surgical patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. , 2013, Academic radiology.

[5]  O. Belohlávek,et al.  The analysis of factors affecting the threshold on repeated 18F-FDG-PET/CT investigations measured by the PERCIST protocol in patients with esophageal carcinoma , 2012, Nuclear medicine communications.

[6]  B. Loo,et al.  Metabolic Tumor Volume Predicts Disease Progression and Survival in Patients with Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Anal Canal , 2013, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[7]  Nan-Tsing Chiu,et al.  Prognostic value of whole-body total lesion glycolysis at pretreatment FDG PET/CT in non-small cell lung cancer. , 2012, Radiology.

[8]  J Nucl Med , 2010 .

[9]  Dorte Nielsen,et al.  Comparison of EORTC Criteria and PERCIST for PET/CT Response Evaluation of Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Treated with Irinotecan and Cetuximab , 2013, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[10]  Vladimir Y. Panin,et al.  Fully 3-D PET reconstruction with system matrix derived from point source measurements , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[11]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[12]  Anthony C. Davison,et al.  Bootstrap Methods and Their Application , 1998 .

[13]  Y. Jhanwar,et al.  The role of PET in lymphoma. , 2006, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[14]  Jeong Hyun Lee,et al.  Prognostic Value of Preoperative Metabolic Tumor Volume and Total Lesion Glycolysis Measured by 18F-FDG PET/CT in Salivary Gland Carcinomas , 2013, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[15]  D. Jeon,et al.  Initial Metabolic Tumor Volume Measured by 18F-FDG PET/CT Can Predict the Outcome of Osteosarcoma of the Extremities , 2013, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[16]  Yongxue Zhang,et al.  Prognostic Predictive Value of Total Lesion Glycolysis From 18F-FDG PET/CT in Post-Surgical Patients With Epithelial Ovarian Cancer , 2013, Clinical nuclear medicine.

[17]  R. Wahl,et al.  From RECIST to PERCIST: Evolving Considerations for PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors , 2009, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[18]  Ora Israel,et al.  Early detection of cancer recurrence: 18F-FDG PET/CT can make a difference in diagnosis and patient care. , 2007, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[19]  R. Subramaniam,et al.  Liver SULmean at FDG PET/CT: interreader agreement and impact of placement of volume of interest. , 2013, Radiology.

[20]  A. Iagaru,et al.  Prognostic value of metabolic tumor volume and velocity in predicting head-and-neck cancer outcomes. , 2010, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[21]  R. Korn,et al.  18-FDG PET/CT assessment of basal cell carcinoma with vismodegib , 2012, Cancer medicine.

[22]  R. Wahl,et al.  A Phase I Trial of Erlotinib and Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy for Stage III and IV (M0) Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck , 2012, Clinical Cancer Research.

[23]  B. C. Penney,et al.  Prognostic value of metabolic tumor burden on 18F-FDG PET in nonsurgical patients with non-small cell lung cancer , 2011, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[24]  David Dagan Feng,et al.  Automated and Robust PERCIST-based Thresholding framework for whole body PET-CT studies , 2012, 2012 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[25]  W. Oyen,et al.  18F-FDG PET Early Response Evaluation of Locally Advanced Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer Treated with Concomitant Chemoradiotherapy , 2013, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[26]  Hao Wang,et al.  Differentiation of HIV-associated lymphoma from HIV-associated reactive adenopathy using quantitative FDG PET and symmetry , 2014, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[27]  T. Nagaoka,et al.  Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: prediction of pathologic response with PET/CT and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging--prospective assessment. , 2012, Radiology.

[28]  T. Watabe,et al.  Evaluation of Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Esophageal Cancer: PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors Versus Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors , 2012, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[29]  S. Holm A Simple Sequentially Rejective Multiple Test Procedure , 1979 .

[30]  Milan Sonka,et al.  Automated measurement of uptake in cerebellum, liver, and aortic arch in full-body FDG PET/CT scans. , 2012, Medical physics.