JNM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH RSS TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Prévost, S.
Right arrow Articles by Bénard, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Prévost, S.
Right arrow Articles by Bénard, F.
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Vol. 47 No. 11 1902
© 2006 by Society of Nuclear Medicine

Reply: Use of Anthropometric Factors in 18F-FDG PET Bone Marrow SUVs

Sylvain Prévost and François Bénard

Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke Fleurimont, Quebec, Canada

REPLY: We thank Dr. Thie for his interest in our paper (1). Because we observed a very strong correlation between bone marrow standardized uptake value (SUV) and actual weight of the patient (as opposed to what was previously reported by Zasadny et al. (2) for a population of 28 females), we examined several approaches to calculate SUV, based mainly on lean body mass or body surface area, including those approaches reported by Sugawara et al. (3). We chose the method that showed the weakest correlation coefficient between weight and bone marrow SUV in our population—a method that turned out to be the one Dr. Thie accurately refers to as "female ideal body weight" in his letter.

Nevertheless, SUV calculations using either the male ideal body weight or the correct ideal body weight (f(H, sex)) gave similar results in correlation coefficients between bone marrow 18F-FDG uptake and weight (Table 1) and in the prognostic value of bone marrow hypermetabolism. This finding led us to the arguable choice of using a unique formula for the sake of simplicity in day-to-day clinical practice although possibly less accurate from a rigorous scientific point of view.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 1 Effect of Correlation Parameter on SUV Calculation

 
Table 1 shows that, unlike Houseni et al. (4), we did not observe a significant correlation between bone marrow metabolism and patient age. We did observe a slight tendency toward a negative correlation but not reaching statistical significance. Moreover, the ratio of bone marrow activity to liver activity was obtained by comparing bone marrow metabolism to a patient's own liver, not to the livers of a healthy population. The only effect of a rising liver SUV with age would be a decrease in the likelihood of detecting abnormal bone marrow activity in older patients. However, as reported by El-Haddad et al. (5), there seemed to be a plateau after the fifth decade of life, an age group that comprises most lung cancer patients.

To evaluate the prognostic value of tumor SUV, most authors in the literature up to now have used the standard weight-corrected SUV. We preferred to use this approach as well, considering that this factor was one of the few, along with stage of disease-related variables, that were consistently reported in multivariate analyses in similar studies. Again, the calculation of the SUV with the correct ideal-body-weight approach provided a similar prognostic value.

We agree that multiple comparisons can sometimes be misleading for variables with borderline significance. The impact of the number of variables is more complex in multivariate analyses. To minimize this problem, we adhered to a rule of thumb that recommends that a Cox model should have at least 10 outcomes per variable included (6). According to the size of our sample (120 patients, 84 deaths), we would be allowed to include as many as 8 different factors in a single model. With the backward-deletion approach, a maximum of 10 factors was entered simultaneously in a model because variables that were obviously not independent were not all included. For example, among all the stage-related factors, only the most significant factor was included in the model (N factor). Using the forward-selection method, no more than 7 factors were entered simultaneously.

We are confident that the prognostic value of bone marrow hypermetabolism we reported is not just a statistical aberration but reflects some real underlying pathophysiologic processes. We certainly agree that further investigations are of interest to understand the physiology of 18F-FDG uptake in bone marrow. Dynamic acquisitions could shed additional light by decoupling uptake rate from distribution issues, but this was unfortunately not an option in a retrospective analysis of clinical scans.

References

  1. Prévost S, Boucher L, Larivée P, Boileau R, Bénard F. Bone marrow hypermetabolism on 18F-FDG PET as a survival prognostic factor in non–small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:559–565.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Zasadny KR, Wahl RL. Standardized uptake values of normal tissues at PET with 2-[fluorine-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose: variations with body weight and a method for correction. Radiology. 1993;189:847–850.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Sugawara Y, Zasadny KR, Neuhoff AW, Wahl RL. Reevaluation of the standardized uptake value for FDG: variations with body weight and methods for correction. Radiology. 1999;213:521–525.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Houseni M, Chamroonat W, El-Haddad G, et al. Effects of age on red marrow metabolism as determined by FDG-PET imaging [abstract]. J Nucl Med. 2006;47(suppl):23P.
  5. El-Haddad G, Bozkurt MF, Kumar R, et al. Liver FDG uptake increases with age: implications for detection of focal disease [abstract]. J Nucl Med. 2004; 45(suppl)293P.
  6. Katz MH. Multivariable analysis: a primer for readers of medical research. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138:644–650.[Abstract/Free Full Text]




This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Prévost, S.
Right arrow Articles by Bénard, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Prévost, S.
Right arrow Articles by Bénard, F.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH RSS TABLE OF CONTENTS
JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE