Evaluation of PET quantitation accuracy among multiple discovery IQ PET/CT systems via NEMA image quality test

Introduction: Quantitative imaging biomarkers are becoming usual in oncology for assessing therapy response. The harmonization of image quantitation reporting has become of utmost importance due to the multi-center trials increase. The NEMA image quality test is often considered for the evaluation o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Vallot, Delphine, Ponti, Elena De, Morzenti, Sabrina, Gramek, Anna, Pieczonka, Anna, Reynés-Llompart, Gabriel, Siennicki, Jakub, Deak, Paul, Dutta, Chiranjib, Uribe, Jorge, Caselles, Olivier
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2020
País:España
Institución:Universidad de Barcelona
Repositorio:Dipòsit Digital de la UB
OAI Identifier:oai:diposit.ub.edu:2445/173108
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/2445/173108
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Oncologia
Marcadors bioquímics
Oncology
Biochemical markers
id ES_7be41450af2c19fe22aecd430d1dd5db
oai_identifier_str oai:diposit.ub.edu:2445/173108
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Evaluation of PET quantitation accuracy among multiple discovery IQ PET/CT systems via NEMA image quality testVallot, DelphinePonti, Elena DeMorzenti, SabrinaGramek, AnnaPieczonka, AnnaReynés-Llompart, GabrielSiennicki, JakubDeak, PaulDutta, ChiranjibUribe, JorgeCaselles, OlivierOncologiaMarcadors bioquímicsOncologyBiochemical markersIntroduction: Quantitative imaging biomarkers are becoming usual in oncology for assessing therapy response. The harmonization of image quantitation reporting has become of utmost importance due to the multi-center trials increase. The NEMA image quality test is often considered for the evaluation of quantitation and is more accurate with a radioactive solid phantom that reduces variability. The goal of this project is to determine the level of variability among imaging centers if acquisition and imaging protocol parameters are left to the center's preference while all other parameters are fixed including the scanner type. Methods: A NEMA-IQ phantom filled with radioactive Ge-68 solid resin was imaged in five clinical sites throughout Europe. Sites reconstructed data with OSEM and BSREM algorithms applying the sites' clinical parameters. Images were analyzed according with the NEMA-NU2-2012 standard using the manufacturer-provided NEMA tools to calculate contrast recovery (CR) and background variability (BV) for each sphere and the lung error (LE) estimation. In addition, a F-18-filled NEMA-IQ phantom was also evaluated to obtain a gauge for variability among centers when the sites were provided with identical specific instructions for acquisition and reconstruction protocol (the aggregate of data from 12 additional sites is presented). Results: The data using the Ge-68 solid phantom showed no statistical differences among different sites, proving a very good reproducibility among the PET center models even if dispersion of data is higher with OSEM compared to BSREM. Furthermore, BSREM shows better CR and comparable BV, while LE is slightly reduced. Two centers exhibit significant differences in CR and BV values for the F-18 NEMA NU2-2012 experiments; these outlier results are explained. Conclusion: The same PET system type from the various sites produced similar quantitative results, despite allowing each site to choose their clinical protocols with no restriction on data acquisition and reconstruction parameters. BSREM leads to lower dispersion of quantitative data among different sites. A solid radioactive phantom may be recommended to qualify the sites to perform quantitative imaging.Springer2020info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://hdl.handle.net/2445/173108Articles publicats en revistes (Institut d'lnvestigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL))reponame:Dipòsit Digital de la UBinstname:Universidad de BarcelonaInglésReproducció del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40658-020-00294-yEjnmmi Physics, 2020, vol. 7https://doi.org/10.1186/s40658-020-00294-ycc by (c) Vallot et al., 2020http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:diposit.ub.edu:2445/1731082026-05-27T06:46:51Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Evaluation of PET quantitation accuracy among multiple discovery IQ PET/CT systems via NEMA image quality test
title Evaluation of PET quantitation accuracy among multiple discovery IQ PET/CT systems via NEMA image quality test
spellingShingle Evaluation of PET quantitation accuracy among multiple discovery IQ PET/CT systems via NEMA image quality test
Vallot, Delphine
Oncologia
Marcadors bioquímics
Oncology
Biochemical markers
title_short Evaluation of PET quantitation accuracy among multiple discovery IQ PET/CT systems via NEMA image quality test
title_full Evaluation of PET quantitation accuracy among multiple discovery IQ PET/CT systems via NEMA image quality test
title_fullStr Evaluation of PET quantitation accuracy among multiple discovery IQ PET/CT systems via NEMA image quality test
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of PET quantitation accuracy among multiple discovery IQ PET/CT systems via NEMA image quality test
title_sort Evaluation of PET quantitation accuracy among multiple discovery IQ PET/CT systems via NEMA image quality test
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Vallot, Delphine
Ponti, Elena De
Morzenti, Sabrina
Gramek, Anna
Pieczonka, Anna
Reynés-Llompart, Gabriel
Siennicki, Jakub
Deak, Paul
Dutta, Chiranjib
Uribe, Jorge
Caselles, Olivier
author Vallot, Delphine
author_facet Vallot, Delphine
Ponti, Elena De
Morzenti, Sabrina
Gramek, Anna
Pieczonka, Anna
Reynés-Llompart, Gabriel
Siennicki, Jakub
Deak, Paul
Dutta, Chiranjib
Uribe, Jorge
Caselles, Olivier
author_role author
author2 Ponti, Elena De
Morzenti, Sabrina
Gramek, Anna
Pieczonka, Anna
Reynés-Llompart, Gabriel
Siennicki, Jakub
Deak, Paul
Dutta, Chiranjib
Uribe, Jorge
Caselles, Olivier
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Oncologia
Marcadors bioquímics
Oncology
Biochemical markers
topic Oncologia
Marcadors bioquímics
Oncology
Biochemical markers
description Introduction: Quantitative imaging biomarkers are becoming usual in oncology for assessing therapy response. The harmonization of image quantitation reporting has become of utmost importance due to the multi-center trials increase. The NEMA image quality test is often considered for the evaluation of quantitation and is more accurate with a radioactive solid phantom that reduces variability. The goal of this project is to determine the level of variability among imaging centers if acquisition and imaging protocol parameters are left to the center's preference while all other parameters are fixed including the scanner type. Methods: A NEMA-IQ phantom filled with radioactive Ge-68 solid resin was imaged in five clinical sites throughout Europe. Sites reconstructed data with OSEM and BSREM algorithms applying the sites' clinical parameters. Images were analyzed according with the NEMA-NU2-2012 standard using the manufacturer-provided NEMA tools to calculate contrast recovery (CR) and background variability (BV) for each sphere and the lung error (LE) estimation. In addition, a F-18-filled NEMA-IQ phantom was also evaluated to obtain a gauge for variability among centers when the sites were provided with identical specific instructions for acquisition and reconstruction protocol (the aggregate of data from 12 additional sites is presented). Results: The data using the Ge-68 solid phantom showed no statistical differences among different sites, proving a very good reproducibility among the PET center models even if dispersion of data is higher with OSEM compared to BSREM. Furthermore, BSREM shows better CR and comparable BV, while LE is slightly reduced. Two centers exhibit significant differences in CR and BV values for the F-18 NEMA NU2-2012 experiments; these outlier results are explained. Conclusion: The same PET system type from the various sites produced similar quantitative results, despite allowing each site to choose their clinical protocols with no restriction on data acquisition and reconstruction parameters. BSREM leads to lower dispersion of quantitative data among different sites. A solid radioactive phantom may be recommended to qualify the sites to perform quantitative imaging.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv https://hdl.handle.net/2445/173108
url https://hdl.handle.net/2445/173108
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Reproducció del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40658-020-00294-y
Ejnmmi Physics, 2020, vol. 7
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40658-020-00294-y
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv cc by (c) Vallot et al., 2020
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es/
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv cc by (c) Vallot et al., 2020
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Springer
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Springer
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Articles publicats en revistes (Institut d'lnvestigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL))
reponame:Dipòsit Digital de la UB
instname:Universidad de Barcelona
instname_str Universidad de Barcelona
reponame_str Dipòsit Digital de la UB
collection Dipòsit Digital de la UB
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869411549323460608
score 15,300719

Similares en LA Referencia