Improved image resolution on thoracic carcinomas by quantitative <sup>18</sup>F-FDG coincidence SPECT/CT in comparison to <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT

Zheng Yuming; Jin Chaoling; Cui Huijuan; Dai Haojie; Yan Jue; Han Pingping; Hsu Bailing

doi:10.7555/JBR.33.20190004

Volume 34 Issue 4

Jul. 2020

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Abstract

References

The Journal of Biomedical Research > 2020 > 34(4): 309-317. > DOI: 10.7555/JBR.33.20190004

Zheng Yuming, Jin Chaoling, Cui Huijuan, Dai Haojie, Yan Jue, Han Pingping, Hsu Bailing. Improved image resolution on thoracic carcinomas by quantitative ¹⁸F-FDG coincidence SPECT/CT in comparison to ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT[J]. The Journal of Biomedical Research, 2020, 34(4): 309-317. DOI: 10.7555/JBR.33.20190004

Citation:

PDF (1389 KB)

Improved image resolution on thoracic carcinomas by quantitative ¹⁸F-FDG coincidence SPECT/CT in comparison to ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT

1.
Nuclear Medicine Department
2.
Oncology of Integrative Medicine Department, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing 100029, China
3.
Nuclear Medicine Department, Danli Hospital, Beijing 100073, China
4.
Nuclear Science and Engineering Institute, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, MO 65201, USA

More Information

Corresponding author:
Pingping Han, Nuclear Medicine Department, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing 100029, China. Tel: +86-010-84205508, E-mail: hanjiangpingping@163.com

Bailing Hsu, Nuclear Science and Engineering Institute, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, MO 65201, USA. Tel: +1-573-882-8201, E-mail: bailinghsu@gmail.com
Received Date: January 03, 2019
Revised Date: May 20, 2019
Accepted Date: June 03, 2019
Available Online: August 15, 2019

Graphical Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Currently, ¹⁸F-FDG coincidence SPECT (Co-SPECT)/CT scan still serves as an important tool for diagnosis, staging, and evaluation of cancer treatment in developing countries. We implemented full physical corrections (FPC) to Co-SPECT (quantitative Co-SPECT) to improve the image resolution and contrast along with the capability for image quantitation. FPC included attenuation, scatter, resolution recovery, and noise reduction. A standard NEMA phantom filled with 10:1 F-18 activity concentration ratio in spheres and background was utilized to evaluate image performance. Subsequently, 15 patients with histologically confirmed thoracic carcinomas were included to undergo a ¹⁸F-FDG Co-SPECT/CT scan followed by a ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT scan. Functional parameters as SUVmax, SUVmean, SULpeak, and MTV from both quantitative Co-SPECT and PET were analyzed. Image resolution of Co-SPECT for NEMA phantom was improved to reveal the smallest sphere from a diameter of 28 mm to 22 mm (17 mm for PET). The image contrast was enhanced from 1.7 to 6.32 (6.69 for PET) with slightly degraded uniformity in background (3.1% vs. 6.7%) (5.6% for PET). Patients' SUVmax, SUVmean, SULpeak, and MTV measured from quantitative Co-SPECT were overall highly correlated with those from PET (r=0.82–0.88). Adjustment of the threshold of SUVmax and SUV to determine SUVmean and MTV did not further change the correlations with PET (r=0.81–0.88). Adding full physical corrections to Co-SPECT images can significantly improve image resolution and contrast to reveal smaller tumor lesions along with the capability to quantify functional parameters like PET/CT.
- ¹⁸F-FDG,
- coincidence SPECT/CT,
- full physical corrections,
- thoracic carcinomas,
- image quantitation

FullText(HTML)

References (20)

References

[1]	Facey K, Bradbury I, Laking G, et al. Overview of the clinical effectiveness of positron emission tomography imaging in selected cancers[J]. Health Technol Assess, 2007, 44(11): iii-iv, xi–267.
[2]	Gallamini A, Zwarthoed C, Borra A. Positron emission tomography (PET) in oncology[J]. Cancers, 2014, 6(4): 1821–1889. doi: 10.3390/cancers6041821
[3]	Ben-Haim S, Ell P. ¹⁸F-FDG PET and PET/CT in the evaluation of cancer treatment response[J]. J Nucl Med, 2009, 50(1): 88–99.
[4]	Martin WH, Delbeke D, Patton JA, et al. FDG-SPECT: correlation with FDG-PET[J]. J Nucl Med, 1995, 36(6): 988–995.
[5]	Martin WH, Delbeke D, Patton JA, et al. Detection of malignancies with SPECT versus PET, with 2-[fluorine-18] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose[J]. Radiology, 1996, 198(1): 225–231. doi: 10.1148/radiology.198.1.8539384
[6]	Delbeke D, Patton JA, Martin WH, et al. FDG PET and dual-head gamma camera positron coincidence detection imaging of suspected malignancies and brain disorders[J]. J Nucl Med, 1999, 40(1): 110–117.
[7]	Qiao WL, Zhao JH, Wang C, et al. Comparison of ¹⁸F-FDG coincidence SPECT imaging and computed tomography in the initial staging and therapeutic evaluation of lymphomas[J]. Chin J Oncol (in Chinese), 2007, 29(7): 536–539.
[8]	Mao YS, He J, Zheng R, et al. The role of ¹⁸F-FDG DHC SPECT-CT in the diagnosis and staging for lung cancer[J]. Chin J Oncol (in Chinese), 2008, 30(12): 933–936.
[9]	Seo Y, Mari C, Hasegawa BH. Technological development and advances in single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography[J]. Semin Nucl Med, 2008, 38(3): 177–198. doi: 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2008.01.001
[10]	Barret O, Carpenter TA, Clark JC, et al. Monte Carlo simulation and scatter correction of the GE Advance PET scanner with SimSET and Geant4[J]. Phys Med Biol, 2005, 50(20): 4823–4840. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/50/20/006
[11]	Watson PG, Mainegra-Hing E, Tomic N, et al. Implementation of an efficient Monte Carlo calculation for CBCT scatter correction: phantom study[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys, 2015, 16(4): 216–227. doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v16i4.5393
[12]	Sureau FC, Reader AJ, Comtat C, et al. Impact of image-space resolution modeling for studies with the high-resolution research tomograph[J]. J Nucl Med, 2008, 49(6): 1000–1008. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.107.045351
[13]	Rahmim A, Qi JY, Sossi V. Resolution modeling in PET imaging: theory, practice, benefits, and pitfalls[J]. Med Phys, 2013, 40(6): 064301.
[14]	Hsu B, Hu LH, Yang BH, et al. SPECT myocardial blood flow quantitation toward clinical use: a comparative study with ¹³N-Ammonia PET myocardial blood flow quantitation[J]. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2017, 44(1): 117–128. doi: 10.1007/s00259-016-3491-5
[15]	Gong K, Cherry SR, Qi JY. On the assessment of spatial resolution of PET systems with iterative image reconstruction[J]. Phys Med Biol, 2016, 61(5): N193–N202. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/61/5/N193
[16]	Melcher CL. Scintillation crystals for PET[J]. J Nucl Med, 2000, 41(6): 1051–1055.
[17]	Bettinardi V, Mancosu P, Danna M, et al. Two-dimensional vs three-dimensional imaging in whole body oncologic PET/CT: a Discovery-STE phantom and patient study[J]. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2007, 51(3): 214–223.
[18]	Tanaka E, Hasegawa T, Yamashita T, et al. A 2D/3D hybrid PET scanner with rotating partial slice-septa and its quantitative procedures[J]. Phys Med Biol, 2000, 45(10): 2821–2841. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/45/10/307
[19]	Surti S. Update on time-of-flight PET imaging[J]. J Nucl Med, 2015, 56(1): 98–105. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.114.145029
[20]	El Fakhri G, Surti S, Trott CM, et al. Improvement in lesion detection with whole-body oncologic time-of-flight PET[J]. J Nucl Med, 2011, 52(3): 347–353. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.110.080382

[1]	Dongfang You, Hongyang Xu, Xin Chen, Jiawei Zhou, Yaqian Wu, Yingdan Tang, Zhongtian Wang, Yang Zhao, Fang Shao. Association between soft drink consumption types and risk of lung cancer and all-cancer: A prospective study of PLCO data[J]. The Journal of Biomedical Research, 2022, 36(6): 390-400. DOI: 10.7555/JBR.36.20220135
[2]	Ma Hongxia, Shen Hongbing. From human genome epidemiology to systems epidemiology: current progress and future perspective[J]. The Journal of Biomedical Research, 2020, 34(5): 323-327. DOI: 10.7555/JBR.34.20200027
[3]	Tiwari-Heckler Shilpa, Jiang Z. Gordon, Popov Yury, J. Mukamal Kenneth. Daily high-dose aspirin does not lower APRI in the Aspirin-Myocardial Infarction Study[J]. The Journal of Biomedical Research, 2020, 34(2): 139-142. DOI: 10.7555/JBR.33.20190041
[4]	Huan Liu, Shijiang Zhang, Yongfeng Shao, Xiaohu Lu, Weidong Gu, Buqing Ni, Qun Gu, Junjie Du. Biomechanical characterization of a novel ring connector for sutureless aortic anastomosis[J]. The Journal of Biomedical Research, 2018, 32(6): 454-460. DOI: 10.7555/JBR.31.20170011
[5]	Huanqiang Wang, Congying Yang, Siyuan Wang, Tian Wang, Jingling Han, Kai Wei, Fucun Liu, Jida Xu, Xianzhen Peng, Jianming Wang. Cell-free plasma hypermethylated CASZ1, CDH13 and ING2 are promising biomarkers of esophageal cancer[J]. The Journal of Biomedical Research, 2018, 32(6): 424-433. DOI: 10.7555/JBR.32.20170065
[6]	Didi Zhu, Jiamin Yuan, Rui Zhu, Yao Wang, Zhiyong Qian, Jiangang Zou. Pathway-based analysis of genome-wide association study of circadian phenotypes[J]. The Journal of Biomedical Research, 2018, 32(5): 361-370. DOI: 10.7555/JBR.32.20170102
[7]	Sang-Yong Eom, Dong-Hyuk Yim, Jung-Hyun Kim, Joo-Byung Chae, Yong-Dae Kim, Heon Kim. A pilot exome-wide association study of age-related cataract in Koreans[J]. The Journal of Biomedical Research, 2016, 30(3): 186-190. DOI: 10.7555/JBR.30.2016K0002
[8]	Honggang Yi, Hongmei Wo, Yang Zhao, Ruyang Zhang, Junchen Dai, Guangfu Jin, Hongxia Ma, Tangchun Wu, Zhibin Hu, Dongxin Lin, Hongbing Shen, Feng Chen. Comparison of dimension reduction-based logistic regression models forcase-control genome-wide association study: principal components analysis vs. partial least squares[J]. The Journal of Biomedical Research, 2015, 29(4): 298-307. DOI: 10.7555/JBR.29.20140043
[9]	Ping Zeng, Yang Zhao, Cheng Qian, Liwei Zhang, Ruyang Zhang, Jianwei Gou, Jin Liu, Liya Liu, Feng Chen. Statistical analysis for genome-wide association study[J]. The Journal of Biomedical Research, 2015, 29(4): 285-297. DOI: 10.7555/JBR.29.20140007
[10]	Yangyang Zhang, Yanhu Wu, Biao Yuan, Xiang Liu, Sheng Zhao, Zhi Li, Yu Xia. Coronary artery bypass grafting with concomitant resection for carcinoma of lung[J]. The Journal of Biomedical Research, 2010, 24(1): 77-80.