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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Byrd, Darrin W., Doot, Robert K., Allberg, Keith C., MacDonald, Lawrence R., McDougald, Wendy A., Elston, Brian F., Linden, Hannah M., Kinahan, Paul E.
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