The age of reason for FDG PET image-derived indices

The clinical use of Positron Emission Tomography (PET) imaging using the 2-deoxy-2-(18F)fluoro-D-glucose (18F-FDG) is currently predominantly focused on diagnostic purposes within the field of oncology. Within this context, image analysis is largely based on visual interpretation and the use of simple image derived indices, such as the maximum standardised uptake value (SUVmax), which corresponds to the voxel with the maximum activity concentration within the tumour scaled by the administered activity, patient weight and blood glucose concentration. On the other hand, during the last few years there has been increasing interest in the use of 18F-FDG PET imaging for the prediction and monitoring of therapy response. Within this context the SUVmax has been also predominantly used, where differences between a pre-treatment and post-treatment scan have been shown to closely correlate with clinical response to treatment for a number of different cancer models [1,2].

[1]  Robert Jeraj,et al.  Impact of the Definition of Peak Standardized Uptake Value on Quantification of Treatment Response , 2012, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[2]  Maximilien Vermandel,et al.  Pre-therapy 18F-FDG PET quantitative parameters help in predicting the response to radioimmunotherapy in non-Hodgkin lymphoma , 2010, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[3]  Howard Y. Chang,et al.  Decoding global gene expression programs in liver cancer by noninvasive imaging , 2007, Nature Biotechnology.

[4]  Adriaan A. Lammertsma,et al.  Effects of ROI definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial , 2005, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[5]  Xiaoyuan Chen,et al.  Molecular imaging in cancer treatment , 2011, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[6]  Kyung Soo Lee,et al.  Volume-Based Parameter of 18F-FDG PET/CT in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: Prediction of Therapeutic Response and Prognostic Implications , 2010, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[7]  Florent Tixier,et al.  Prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET image-based parameters in oesophageal cancer and impact of tumour delineation methodology , 2011, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

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

[9]  Wolfgang A Weber,et al.  Assessing Tumor Response to Therapy , 2009, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[10]  Y. D'Asseler,et al.  Standardized added metabolic activity (SAM): a partial volume independent marker of total lesion glycolysis in liver metastases , 2012, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

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

[12]  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.

[13]  I. Buvat,et al.  Comparative Assessment of Methods for Estimating Tumor Volume and Standardized Uptake Value in 18F-FDG PET , 2010, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[14]  Habib Zaidi,et al.  PET-guided delineation of radiation therapy treatment volumes: a survey of image segmentation techniques , 2010, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[15]  Issam El-Naqa,et al.  Exploring feature-based approaches in PET images for predicting cancer treatment outcomes , 2009, Pattern Recognit..

[16]  Dimitris Visvikis,et al.  PET functional volume delineation: a robustness and repeatability study , 2011, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[17]  John L. Humm,et al.  Tumor Treatment Response Based on Visual and Quantitative Changes in Global Tumor Glycolysis Using PET-FDG Imaging. The Visual Response Score and the Change in Total Lesion Glycolysis. , 1999, Clinical positron imaging : official journal of the Institute for Clinical P.E.T.

[18]  C. Rübe,et al.  Comparison of different methods for delineation of 18F-FDG PET-positive tissue for target volume definition in radiotherapy of patients with non-Small cell lung cancer. , 2005, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[19]  Dimitris Visvikis,et al.  Baseline 18F-FDG PET image-derived parameters for therapy response prediction in oesophageal cancer , 2011, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.