HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH RSS TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: jnumed.108.057182v1 50/Suppl_1/11S    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Boellaard, R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Boellaard, R.

Standards for PET Image Acquisition and Quantitative Data Analysis

Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Correspondence: For correspondence or reprints contact: Ronald Boellaard, Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET Research, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands. E-mail: r.boellaard{at}vumc.nl

Quantitative ¹⁸F-FDG PET is increasingly being recognized as an important tool for diagnosis, determination of prognosis, and response monitoring in oncology. However, PET quantification with, for example, standardized uptake values (SUVs) is affected by many technical and physiologic factors. As a result, some of the variations in the literature on SUV-based patient outcomes are explained by differences in ¹⁸F-FDG PET study methods. Various technical and clinical studies have been performed to understand the factors affecting PET quantification. On the basis of the results of those studies, several recommendations and guidelines have been proposed with the aims of improving the image quality and the quantitative accuracy of ¹⁸F-FDG PET studies. In this contribution, an overview of recommendations and guidelines for quantitative ¹⁸F-FDG PET studies in oncology is provided. Special attention is given to the rationale underlying certain recommendations and to some of the differences in various guidelines.

Key Words: guidelines • standards • PET • standardized uptake value

COPYRIGHT © 2009 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine, Inc.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				W. A. Weber Assessing Tumor Response to Therapy J. Nucl. Med., May 1, 2009; 50(Suppl_1): 1S - 10S. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]