Cargando…

Impact of partial-volume correction in oncological PET studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE: Positron-emission tomography can be useful in oncology for diagnosis, (re)staging, determining prognosis, and response assessment. However, partial-volume effects hamper accurate quantification of lesions <2–3× the PET system’s spatial resolution, and the clinical impact of this is not e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cysouw, Matthijs C. F., Kramer, Gerbrand M., Schoonmade, Linda J., Boellaard, Ronald, de Vet, Henrica C. W., Hoekstra, Otto S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5656693/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28776088
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3775-4
_version_ 1783273741922336768
author Cysouw, Matthijs C. F.
Kramer, Gerbrand M.
Schoonmade, Linda J.
Boellaard, Ronald
de Vet, Henrica C. W.
Hoekstra, Otto S.
author_facet Cysouw, Matthijs C. F.
Kramer, Gerbrand M.
Schoonmade, Linda J.
Boellaard, Ronald
de Vet, Henrica C. W.
Hoekstra, Otto S.
author_sort Cysouw, Matthijs C. F.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Positron-emission tomography can be useful in oncology for diagnosis, (re)staging, determining prognosis, and response assessment. However, partial-volume effects hamper accurate quantification of lesions <2–3× the PET system’s spatial resolution, and the clinical impact of this is not evident. This systematic review provides an up-to-date overview of studies investigating the impact of partial-volume correction (PVC) in oncological PET studies. METHODS: We searched in PubMed and Embase databases according to the PRISMA statement, including studies from inception till May 9, 2016. Two reviewers independently screened all abstracts and eligible full-text articles and performed quality assessment according to QUADAS-2 and QUIPS criteria. For a set of similar diagnostic studies, we statistically pooled the results using bivariate meta-regression. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies were eligible for inclusion. Overall, study quality was good. For diagnosis and nodal staging, PVC yielded a strong trend of increased sensitivity at expense of specificity. Meta-analysis of six studies investigating diagnosis of pulmonary nodules (679 lesions) showed no significant change in diagnostic accuracy after PVC (p = 0.222). Prognostication was not improved for non-small cell lung cancer and esophageal cancer, whereas it did improve for head and neck cancer. Response assessment was not improved by PVC for (locally advanced) breast cancer or rectal cancer, and it worsened in metastatic colorectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The accumulated evidence to date does not support routine application of PVC in standard clinical PET practice. Consensus on the preferred PVC methodology in oncological PET should be reached. Partial-volume-corrected data should be used as adjuncts to, but not yet replacement for, uncorrected data. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00259-017-3775-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5656693
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56566932017-11-01 Impact of partial-volume correction in oncological PET studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis Cysouw, Matthijs C. F. Kramer, Gerbrand M. Schoonmade, Linda J. Boellaard, Ronald de Vet, Henrica C. W. Hoekstra, Otto S. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Review Article PURPOSE: Positron-emission tomography can be useful in oncology for diagnosis, (re)staging, determining prognosis, and response assessment. However, partial-volume effects hamper accurate quantification of lesions <2–3× the PET system’s spatial resolution, and the clinical impact of this is not evident. This systematic review provides an up-to-date overview of studies investigating the impact of partial-volume correction (PVC) in oncological PET studies. METHODS: We searched in PubMed and Embase databases according to the PRISMA statement, including studies from inception till May 9, 2016. Two reviewers independently screened all abstracts and eligible full-text articles and performed quality assessment according to QUADAS-2 and QUIPS criteria. For a set of similar diagnostic studies, we statistically pooled the results using bivariate meta-regression. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies were eligible for inclusion. Overall, study quality was good. For diagnosis and nodal staging, PVC yielded a strong trend of increased sensitivity at expense of specificity. Meta-analysis of six studies investigating diagnosis of pulmonary nodules (679 lesions) showed no significant change in diagnostic accuracy after PVC (p = 0.222). Prognostication was not improved for non-small cell lung cancer and esophageal cancer, whereas it did improve for head and neck cancer. Response assessment was not improved by PVC for (locally advanced) breast cancer or rectal cancer, and it worsened in metastatic colorectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The accumulated evidence to date does not support routine application of PVC in standard clinical PET practice. Consensus on the preferred PVC methodology in oncological PET should be reached. Partial-volume-corrected data should be used as adjuncts to, but not yet replacement for, uncorrected data. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00259-017-3775-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017-08-04 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5656693/ /pubmed/28776088 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3775-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Review Article
Cysouw, Matthijs C. F.
Kramer, Gerbrand M.
Schoonmade, Linda J.
Boellaard, Ronald
de Vet, Henrica C. W.
Hoekstra, Otto S.
Impact of partial-volume correction in oncological PET studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Impact of partial-volume correction in oncological PET studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Impact of partial-volume correction in oncological PET studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Impact of partial-volume correction in oncological PET studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Impact of partial-volume correction in oncological PET studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Impact of partial-volume correction in oncological PET studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort impact of partial-volume correction in oncological pet studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5656693/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28776088
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3775-4
work_keys_str_mv AT cysouwmatthijscf impactofpartialvolumecorrectioninoncologicalpetstudiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT kramergerbrandm impactofpartialvolumecorrectioninoncologicalpetstudiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT schoonmadelindaj impactofpartialvolumecorrectioninoncologicalpetstudiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT boellaardronald impactofpartialvolumecorrectioninoncologicalpetstudiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT devethenricacw impactofpartialvolumecorrectioninoncologicalpetstudiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT hoekstraottos impactofpartialvolumecorrectioninoncologicalpetstudiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis