Accuracy and Precision of Partial-Volume Correction in Oncological PET/CT Studies

Matthijs C. F. Cysouw, Gerbrand Maria Kramer, Otto S. Hoekstra, Virginie Frings, Adrianus Johannes de Langen, Egbert F. Smit, Alfons J. M. van den Eertwegh, Daniela E. Oprea-Lager, Ronald Boellaard*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Accurate quantification of tracer uptake in small tumors using PET is hampered by the partial-volume effect as well as by the method of volume-of-interest (VOI) delineation. This study aimed to investigate the effect of partial-volume correction (PVC) combined with several VOI methods on the accuracy and precision of quantitative PET. Methods: Four image-based PVC methods and resolution modeling (applied as PVC) were used in combination with several common VOI methods. Performance was evaluated using simulations, phantom experiments, and clinical repeatability studies. Simulations were based on a whole-body F-18-FDG PET scan in which differently sized spheres were placed in lung and mediastinum. A National Electrical Manufacturers Association NU2 quality phantom was used for the experiments. Repeatability data consisted of an F-18-FDG PET/CT study on 11 patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and an F-18-fluoromethylcholine PET/CT study on 12 patients with metastatic prostate cancer. Results: Phantom data demonstrated that most PVC methods were strongly affected by the applied resolution kernel, with accuracy differing by about 20%-50% between full-width-at half-maximum settings of 5.0 and 7.5 mm. For all PVC methods, large differences in accuracy were seen among all VOI methods. Additionally, the image-based PVC methods were observed to have variable sensitivity to the accuracy of the VOI methods. For most PVC methods, accuracy was strongly affected by more than a 2.5-mm misalignment of true (simulated) VOI. When the optimal VOI method for each PVC method was used, high accuracy could be achieved. For example, resolution modeling for mediastinal lesions and iterative deconvolution for lung lesions were 99% +/- 1.5% and 99% +/- 0.9% accurate, respectively, for spheres 15-40 mm in diameter. Precision worsened slightly for resolution modeling and to a larger extent for some image-based PVC methods. Uncertainties in delineation propagated into uncertainties in PVC performance, as confirmed by the clinical data. Conclusion: The accuracy and precision of the tested PVC methods depended strongly on VOI method, resolution settings, contrast, and spatial alignment of the VOI. PVC has the potential to substantially improve the accuracy of tracer uptake assessment, provided that robust and accurate VOI methods become available. Commonly used delineation methods may not be adequate for this purpose.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1642-1649
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Nuclear Medicine
Volume57
Issue number10
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct-2016

Keywords

  • positron emission tomography
  • partial-volume correction
  • resolution modeling
  • delineation
  • oncology
  • POSITRON-EMISSION-TOMOGRAPHY
  • IMAGE-RECONSTRUCTION
  • TUMOR VOLUME
  • WHOLE-BODY
  • FDG PET/CT
  • DECONVOLUTION
  • REPEATABILITY
  • VALIDATION
  • CANCER
  • RECOMMENDATIONS

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Accuracy and Precision of Partial-Volume Correction in Oncological PET/CT Studies'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this