Cargando…
Evaluation of Cross-Calibrated (68)Ge/(68)Ga Phantoms for Assessing PET/CT Measurement Bias in Oncology Imaging for Single- and Multicenter Trials
Quantitative PET imaging is an important tool for clinical trials evaluating the response of cancers to investigational therapies. The standardized uptake value, used as a quantitative imaging biomarker, is dependent on multiple parameters that may contribute bias and variability. The use of long-li...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Grapho Publications, LLC
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5214172/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28066807 http://dx.doi.org/10.18383/j.tom.2016.00205 |
_version_ | 1782491569818959872 |
---|---|
author | Byrd, Darrin W. Doot, Robert K. Allberg, Keith C. MacDonald, Lawrence R. McDougald, Wendy A. Elston, Brian F. Linden, Hannah M. Kinahan, Paul E. |
author_facet | Byrd, Darrin W. Doot, Robert K. Allberg, Keith C. MacDonald, Lawrence R. McDougald, Wendy A. Elston, Brian F. Linden, Hannah M. Kinahan, Paul E. |
author_sort | Byrd, Darrin W. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Quantitative PET imaging is an important tool for clinical trials evaluating the response of cancers to investigational therapies. The standardized uptake value, used as a quantitative imaging biomarker, is dependent on multiple parameters that may contribute bias and variability. The use of long-lived, sealed PET calibration phantoms offers the advantages of known radioactivity activity concentration and simpler use than aqueous phantoms. We evaluated scanner and dose calibrator sources from two batches of commercially available kits, together at a single site and distributed across a local multicenter PET imaging network. We found that radioactivity concentration was uniform within the phantoms. Within the regions of interest drawn in the phantom images, coefficients of variation of voxel values were less than 2%. Across phantoms, coefficients of variation for mean signal were close to 1%. Biases of the standardized uptake value estimated with the kits varied by site and were seen to change in time by approximately ±5%. We conclude that these biases cannot be assumed constant over time. The kits provide a robust method to monitor PET scanner and dose calibrator biases, and resulting biases in standardized uptake values. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5214172 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Grapho Publications, LLC |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-52141722017-01-05 Evaluation of Cross-Calibrated (68)Ge/(68)Ga Phantoms for Assessing PET/CT Measurement Bias in Oncology Imaging for Single- and Multicenter Trials Byrd, Darrin W. Doot, Robert K. Allberg, Keith C. MacDonald, Lawrence R. McDougald, Wendy A. Elston, Brian F. Linden, Hannah M. Kinahan, Paul E. Tomography Research Articles Quantitative PET imaging is an important tool for clinical trials evaluating the response of cancers to investigational therapies. The standardized uptake value, used as a quantitative imaging biomarker, is dependent on multiple parameters that may contribute bias and variability. The use of long-lived, sealed PET calibration phantoms offers the advantages of known radioactivity activity concentration and simpler use than aqueous phantoms. We evaluated scanner and dose calibrator sources from two batches of commercially available kits, together at a single site and distributed across a local multicenter PET imaging network. We found that radioactivity concentration was uniform within the phantoms. Within the regions of interest drawn in the phantom images, coefficients of variation of voxel values were less than 2%. Across phantoms, coefficients of variation for mean signal were close to 1%. Biases of the standardized uptake value estimated with the kits varied by site and were seen to change in time by approximately ±5%. We conclude that these biases cannot be assumed constant over time. The kits provide a robust method to monitor PET scanner and dose calibrator biases, and resulting biases in standardized uptake values. Grapho Publications, LLC 2016-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5214172/ /pubmed/28066807 http://dx.doi.org/10.18383/j.tom.2016.00205 Text en © 2016 The Authors. Published by Grapho Publications, LLC https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY 4.0 license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Research Articles Byrd, Darrin W. Doot, Robert K. Allberg, Keith C. MacDonald, Lawrence R. McDougald, Wendy A. Elston, Brian F. Linden, Hannah M. Kinahan, Paul E. Evaluation of Cross-Calibrated (68)Ge/(68)Ga Phantoms for Assessing PET/CT Measurement Bias in Oncology Imaging for Single- and Multicenter Trials |
title | Evaluation of Cross-Calibrated (68)Ge/(68)Ga Phantoms for Assessing PET/CT Measurement Bias in Oncology Imaging for Single- and Multicenter Trials |
title_full | Evaluation of Cross-Calibrated (68)Ge/(68)Ga Phantoms for Assessing PET/CT Measurement Bias in Oncology Imaging for Single- and Multicenter Trials |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of Cross-Calibrated (68)Ge/(68)Ga Phantoms for Assessing PET/CT Measurement Bias in Oncology Imaging for Single- and Multicenter Trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of Cross-Calibrated (68)Ge/(68)Ga Phantoms for Assessing PET/CT Measurement Bias in Oncology Imaging for Single- and Multicenter Trials |
title_short | Evaluation of Cross-Calibrated (68)Ge/(68)Ga Phantoms for Assessing PET/CT Measurement Bias in Oncology Imaging for Single- and Multicenter Trials |
title_sort | evaluation of cross-calibrated (68)ge/(68)ga phantoms for assessing pet/ct measurement bias in oncology imaging for single- and multicenter trials |
topic | Research Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5214172/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28066807 http://dx.doi.org/10.18383/j.tom.2016.00205 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT byrddarrinw evaluationofcrosscalibrated68ge68gaphantomsforassessingpetctmeasurementbiasinoncologyimagingforsingleandmulticentertrials AT dootrobertk evaluationofcrosscalibrated68ge68gaphantomsforassessingpetctmeasurementbiasinoncologyimagingforsingleandmulticentertrials AT allbergkeithc evaluationofcrosscalibrated68ge68gaphantomsforassessingpetctmeasurementbiasinoncologyimagingforsingleandmulticentertrials AT macdonaldlawrencer evaluationofcrosscalibrated68ge68gaphantomsforassessingpetctmeasurementbiasinoncologyimagingforsingleandmulticentertrials AT mcdougaldwendya evaluationofcrosscalibrated68ge68gaphantomsforassessingpetctmeasurementbiasinoncologyimagingforsingleandmulticentertrials AT elstonbrianf evaluationofcrosscalibrated68ge68gaphantomsforassessingpetctmeasurementbiasinoncologyimagingforsingleandmulticentertrials AT lindenhannahm evaluationofcrosscalibrated68ge68gaphantomsforassessingpetctmeasurementbiasinoncologyimagingforsingleandmulticentertrials AT kinahanpaule evaluationofcrosscalibrated68ge68gaphantomsforassessingpetctmeasurementbiasinoncologyimagingforsingleandmulticentertrials |