Evaluation of the PET component of simultaneous [18F]choline PET/MRI in prostate cancer: comparison with [18F]choline PET/CT

PurposeThe aim of this study was to evaluate the positron emission tomography (PET) component of [18F]choline PET/MRI and compare it with the PET component of [18F]choline PET/CT in patients with histologically proven prostate cancer and suspected recurrent prostate cancer.MethodsThirty-six patients were examined with simultaneous [18F]choline PET/MRI following combined [18F]choline PET/CT. Fifty-eight PET-positive lesions in PET/CT and PET/MRI were evaluated by measuring the maximum and mean standardized uptake values (SUVmax and SUVmean) using volume of interest (VOI) analysis. A scoring system was applied to determine the quality of the PET images of both PET/CT and PET/MRI. Agreement between PET/CT and PET/MRI regarding SUVmax and SUVmean was tested using Pearson’s product-moment correlation and Bland-Altman analysis.ResultsAll PET-positive lesions that were visible on PET/CT were also detectable on PET/MRI. The quality of the PET images was comparable in both groups. Median SUVmax and SUVmean of all lesions were significantly lower in PET/MRI than in PET/CT (5.2 vs 6.1, p < 0.05 and 2.0 vs 2.6, p < 0.001, respectively). Pearson’s product-moment correlation indicated highly significant correlations between SUVmax of PET/CT and PET/MRI (R = 0.86, p < 0.001) as well as between SUVmean of PET/CT and PET/MRI (R = 0.81, p < 0.001). Bland-Altman analysis revealed lower and upper limits of agreement of −2.77 to 3.64 between SUVmax of PET/CT vs PET/MRI and −1.12 to +2.23 between SUVmean of PET/CT vs PET/MRI.ConclusionPET image quality of PET/MRI was comparable to that of PET/CT. A highly significant correlation between SUVmax and SUVmean was found. Both SUVmax and SUVmean were significantly lower in [18F]choline PET/MRI than in [18F]choline PET/CT. Differences of SUVmax and SUVmean might be caused by different techniques of attenuation correction. Furthermore, differences in biodistribution and biokinetics of [18F]choline between the subsequent examinations and in the respective organ systems have to be taken into account.

[1]  A. Beckett,et al.  AKUFO AND IBARAPA. , 1965, Lancet.

[2]  Peter Faulhaber,et al.  Comparison of Standardized Uptake Values in Normal Structures Between PET/CT and PET/MRI in an Oncology Patient Population , 2013, Molecular Imaging and Biology.

[3]  D. Altman,et al.  STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT , 1986, The Lancet.

[4]  B. Seifert,et al.  Clinical impact of 18F-choline PET/CT in patients with recurrent prostate cancer , 2012, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[5]  Garrett Fitzmaurice,et al.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement. , 2002, Nutrition.

[6]  J M Bland,et al.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement , 1986 .

[7]  A. Drzezga,et al.  First Clinical Experience with Integrated Whole-Body PET/MR: Comparison to PET/CT in Patients with Oncologic Diagnoses , 2012, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[8]  B. Schölkopf,et al.  Towards quantitative PET/MRI: a review of MR-based attenuation correction techniques , 2009, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[9]  R. Boellaard,et al.  Dual-Phase PET-CT to Differentiate [18F]Fluoromethylcholine Uptake in Reactive and Malignant Lymph Nodes in Patients with Prostate Cancer , 2012, PloS one.

[10]  Gerald Antoch,et al.  Whole-body positron emission tomography-CT: optimized CT using oral and IV contrast materials. , 2002, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[11]  B. Pichler,et al.  Pre-clinical PET/MR: technological advances and new perspectives in biomedical research , 2009, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[12]  P. Waldenberger,et al.  18F choline PET/CT in the preoperative staging of prostate cancer in patients with intermediate or high risk of extracapsular disease: a prospective study of 130 patients. , 2010, Radiology.

[13]  V. Canzonieri,et al.  [18F]fluorocholine PET/CT imaging for the detection of recurrent prostate cancer at PSA relapse: experience in 100 consecutive patients , 2006, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[14]  M. Forsting,et al.  Standardized uptake values for [¹⁸F] FDG in normal organ tissues: comparison of whole-body PET/CT and PET/MRI. , 2013, European journal of radiology.

[15]  David Izquierdo-Garcia,et al.  Preclinical Evaluation of MR Attenuation Correction Versus CT Attenuation Correction on a Sequential Whole-Body MR/PET Scanner , 2013, Investigative radiology.

[16]  Sibylle Ziegler,et al.  Comparison of integrated whole-body [11C]choline PET/MR with PET/CT in patients with prostate cancer , 2013, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[17]  M. Uder,et al.  Comparison of lesion detection and quantitation of tracer uptake between PET from a simultaneously acquiring whole-body PET/MR hybrid scanner and PET from PET/CT , 2012, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[18]  A. Ahmadian,et al.  MRI-guided attenuation correction in whole-body PET/MR: assessment of the effect of bone attenuation , 2013, Annals of Nuclear Medicine.

[19]  Nassir Navab,et al.  Tissue Classification as a Potential Approach for Attenuation Correction in Whole-Body PET/MRI: Evaluation with PET/CT Data , 2009, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[20]  R. Boellaard,et al.  Effects of noise, image resolution, and ROI definition on the accuracy of standard uptake values: a simulation study. , 2004, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[21]  Christoph Hoeschen,et al.  A Compartmental Model for Biokinetics and Dosimetry of 18F-Choline in Prostate Cancer Patients , 2012, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[22]  Jae Sung Lee,et al.  Comparison of Segmentation-Based Attenuation Correction Methods for PET/MRI: Evaluation of Bone and Liver Standardized Uptake Value with Oncologic PET/CT Data , 2012, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[23]  W. Oyen,et al.  The Netherlands protocol for standardisation and quantification of FDG whole body PET studies in multi-centre trials , 2008, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.