2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Impact of the Noise Penalty Factor on Quantification in Bayesian Penalized Likelihood (Q.Clear) Reconstructions of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT Scans

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Functional imaging with 68Ga prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) and positron emission tomography (PET) can fulfill an important role in treatment selection and adjustment in prostate cancer. This article focusses on quantitative assessment of 68Ga-PSMA-PET. The effect of various parameters on standardized uptake values (SUVs) is explored, and an optimal Bayesian penalized likelihood (BPL) reconstruction is suggested. PET acquisitions of two phantoms consisting of a background compartment and spheres with diameter 4 mm to 37 mm, both filled with solutions of 68Ga in water, were performed with a GE Discovery 710 PET/CT scanner. Recovery coefficients (RCs) in multiple reconstructions with varying noise penalty factors and acquisition times were determined and analyzed. Apparent recovery coefficients of spheres with a diameter smaller than 17 mm were significantly lower than those of spheres with a diameter of 17 mm and bigger ( p < 0.001) for a tumor-to-background (T/B) ratio of 10:1 and a scan time of 10 min per bed position. With a T/B ratio of 10:1, the four largest spheres exhibit significantly higher RCs than those with a T/B ratio of 20:1 ( p < 0.0001). For spheres with a diameter of 8 mm and less, alignment with the voxel grid potentially affects the RC. Evaluation of PET/CT scans using (semi-)quantitative measures such as SUVs should be performed with great caution, as SUVs are influenced by scanning and reconstruction parameters. Based on the evaluation of multiple reconstructions with different β of phantom scans, an intermediate β (600) is suggested as the optimal value for the reconstruction of clinical 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT scans, considering that both detectability and reproducibility are relevant.

          Related collections

          Most cited references53

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Global, Regional, and National Cancer Incidence, Mortality, Years of Life Lost, Years Lived With Disability, and Disability-Adjusted Life-years for 32 Cancer Groups, 1990 to 2015

          IMPORTANCE Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide. Current estimates on the burden of cancer are needed for cancer control planning. OBJECTIVE To estimate mortality, incidence, years lived with disability (YLDs), years of life lost (YLLs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 32 cancers in 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2015. EVIDENCE REVIEW Cancer mortality was estimated using vital registration system data, cancer registry incidence data (transformed to mortality estimates using separately estimated mortality to incidence [MI] ratios), and verbal autopsy data. Cancer incidence was calculated by dividing mortality estimates through the modeled MI ratios. To calculate cancer prevalence, MI ratios were used to model survival. To calculate YLDs, prevalence estimates were multiplied by disability weights. The YLLs were estimated by multiplying age-specific cancer deaths by the reference life expectancy. DALYs were estimated as the sum of YLDs and YLLs. A sociodemographic index (SDI) was created for each location based on income per capita, educational attainment, and fertility. Countries were categorized by SDI quintiles to summarize results. FINDINGS In 2015, there were 17.5 million cancer cases worldwide and 8.7 million deaths. Between 2005 and 2015, cancer cases increased by 33%, with population aging contributing 16%, population growth 13%, and changes in age-specific rates contributing 4%. For men, the most common cancer globally was prostate cancer (1.6 million cases). Tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer was the leading cause of cancer deaths and DALYs in men (1.2 million deaths and 25.9 million DALYs). For women, the most common cancer was breast cancer (2.4 million cases). Breast cancer was also the leading cause of cancer deaths and DALYs for women (523 000 deaths and 15.1 million DALYs). Overall, cancer caused 208.3 million DALYs worldwide in 2015 for both sexes combined. Between 2005 and 2015, age-standardized incidence rates for all cancers combined increased in 174 of 195 countries or territories. Age-standardized death rates (ASDRs) for all cancers combined decreased within that timeframe in 140 of 195 countries or territories. Countries with an increase in the ASDR due to all cancers were largely located on the African continent. Of all cancers, deaths between 2005 and 2015 decreased significantly for Hodgkin lymphoma (−6.1% [95% uncertainty interval (UI), −10.6% to −1.3%]). The number of deaths also decreased for esophageal cancer, stomach cancer, and chronic myeloid leukemia, although these results were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE As part of the epidemiological transition, cancer incidence is expected to increase in the future, further straining limited health care resources. Appropriate allocation of resources for cancer prevention, early diagnosis, and curative and palliative care requires detailed knowledge of the local burden of cancer. The GBD 2015 study results demonstrate that progress is possible in the war against cancer. However, the major findings also highlight an unmet need for cancer prevention efforts, including tobacco control, vaccination, and the promotion of physical activity and a healthy diet.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0

            The purpose of these guidelines is to assist physicians in recommending, performing, interpreting and reporting the results of FDG PET/CT for oncological imaging of adult patients. PET is a quantitative imaging technique and therefore requires a common quality control (QC)/quality assurance (QA) procedure to maintain the accuracy and precision of quantitation. Repeatability and reproducibility are two essential requirements for any quantitative measurement and/or imaging biomarker. Repeatability relates to the uncertainty in obtaining the same result in the same patient when he or she is examined more than once on the same system. However, imaging biomarkers should also have adequate reproducibility, i.e. the ability to yield the same result in the same patient when that patient is examined on different systems and at different imaging sites. Adequate repeatability and reproducibility are essential for the clinical management of patients and the use of FDG PET/CT within multicentre trials. A common standardised imaging procedure will help promote the appropriate use of FDG PET/CT imaging and increase the value of publications and, therefore, their contribution to evidence-based medicine. Moreover, consistency in numerical values between platforms and institutes that acquire the data will potentially enhance the role of semiquantitative and quantitative image interpretation. Precision and accuracy are additionally important as FDG PET/CT is used to evaluate tumour response as well as for diagnosis, prognosis and staging. Therefore both the previous and these new guidelines specifically aim to achieve standardised uptake value harmonisation in multicentre settings.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer.

              Interstitial radiation (implant) therapy is used to treat clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate, but how it compares with other treatments is not known. To estimate control of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) after radical prostatectomy (RP), external beam radiation (RT), or implant with or without neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Retrospective cohort study of outcome data compared using Cox regression multivariable analyses. A total of 1872 men treated between January 1989 and October 1997 with an RP (n = 888) or implant with or without neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (n = 218) at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, or RT (n = 766) at the Joint Center for Radiation Therapy, Boston, Mass, were enrolled. Actuarial freedom from PSA failure (defined as PSA outcome). The relative risk (RR) of PSA failure in low-risk patients (stage T1c, T2a and PSA level 10 and 20 ng/mL or Gleason score > or =8) treated with implant compared with RP were 3.1 (95% CI, 1.5-6.1) and 3.0 (95% CI, 1.8-5.0), respectively. The addition of androgen deprivation to implant therapy did not improve PSA outcome in high-risk patients but resulted in a PSA outcome that was not statistically different compared with the results obtained using RP or RT in intermediate-risk patients. These results were unchanged when patients were stratified using the traditional rankings of biopsy Gleason scores of 2 through 4 vs 5 through 6 vs 7 vs 8 through 10. Low-risk patients had estimates of 5-year PSA outcome after treatment with RP, RT, or implant with or without neoadjuvant androgen deprivation that were not statistically different, whereas intermediate- and high-risk patients treated with RP or RT did better then those treated by implant. Prospective randomized trials are needed to verify these findings.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                Diagnostics (Basel)
                Diagnostics (Basel)
                diagnostics
                Diagnostics
                MDPI
                2075-4418
                08 May 2021
                May 2021
                : 11
                : 5
                : 847
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Medical Physics, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, Michelangelolaan 2, 5623 EJ Eindhoven, The Netherlands; bertjan.arends@ 123456catharinaziekenhuis.nl
                [2 ]Department of Nuclear Medicine, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, Michelangelolaan 2, 5623 EJ Eindhoven, The Netherlands; mark.roef@ 123456catharinaziekenhuis.nl
                Author notes
                Article
                diagnostics-11-00847
                10.3390/diagnostics11050847
                8150604
                de5ede9a-9009-4c43-83a5-68bba6bc1e9b
                © 2021 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 08 April 2021
                : 04 May 2021
                Categories
                Article

                68ga-psma pet/ct,recovery coefficient,quantitative pet,bayesian penalized likelihood

                Comments

                Comment on this article