Article Figures & Data
Figures
- FIGURE 1.
Response of qualitative 18F-FDG PET assessment scores to increased pharmacologic treatment (A) and to no change in pharmacologic treatment (B). Data are shown as box-and-whisker plots with paired comparisons. ns = P > 0.05. ****P < 0.001.
- FIGURE 2.
Response of semiquantitative 18F-FDG PET assessment scores to increased pharmacologic treatment (A) and to no change in pharmacologic treatment (B). Data are shown as box-and-whisker plots with paired comparisons. ns = P > 0.05. ****P < 0.001.
- FIGURE 3.
Change in 18F-FDG PET assessment metrics in subset of patients with maximum baseline PETVAS using qualitative metrics (A) and semiquantitative metrics (B). ns = P > 0.05. **P < 0.01.
- FIGURE 4.
Improvement in 18F-FDG activity over time in patient with severe vascular inflammation. (A) Baseline imaging study with PETVAS of 27 (maximal score). (B) Follow-up imaging 6 mo later with continued PETVAS of 27 despite visual improvement in arterial 18F-FDG uptake and corresponding decrease in semiquantitative metrics (TBRLiver) from 3.90 to 2.73. Arrows show areas of increased 18F-FDG uptake in right and left subclavian/axillary arteries and abdominal aorta.
Tables
Demographic Giant cell arteritis Takayasu arteritis Total Patients 52 43 95 PET/CT studies per patient 1 study 22 19 41 2 studies 11 14 25 ≥3 studies 19 10 29 Age (y) 69.2 ± 8.9 34.3 ± 10.3 55.9 ± 19.4 Female 41 (78.8%) 33 (76.7%) 74 (77.9%) BMI 27.3 ± 5.5 25.9 ± 6.7 26.8 ± 6.0 CRP 6.8 ± 14.1 10.7 ± 21.7 8.3 ± 17.4 ESR 17.3 ± 19.1 19.4 ± 16.6 18.1 ± 18.2 Daily prednisone (mg) 9.0 ± 13.9 7.2 ± 11.3 8.33 ± 12.9 Disease duration (y) 2.98 ± 2.41 10.9 ± 10.7 6.06 ± 7.94 BMI = body mass index; CRP = C-reactive protein; ESR = erythrocyte sedimentation rate
Qualitative data are number; continuous data are mean ± SD.
- TABLE 2
Performance Characteristics of Semiquantitative and Qualitative PET Assessment Methods in Association with Subjective Reader Interpretation of PET Activity
Descriptive statistic GLMM evaluation Parameter PET active (mean ± SEM) PET inactive (mean ± SEM) AUC (95% CI) Optimal cutoff P AIC LVV (n) 147 62 SUVArtery 3.41 ± 0.10 2.78 ± 0.08 0.67 (0.60–0.75) 3.36 < 0.0001 226.9 TBRLiver 1.45 ± 0.04 1.09 ± 0.02 0.85 (0.80–0.90) 1.22 < 0.0001 179.0 TBRBlood 2.59 ± 0.07 2.03 ± 0.03 0.80 (0.74–0.86) 2.31 < 0.0001 198.2 PETVAS 20.83 ± 0.41 12.87 ± 0.58 0.87 (0.83–0.92) 19.5 < 0.0001 165.2 GLMM = generalized linear mixed model.
- TABLE 3
Performance Characteristics of Semiquantitative and Qualitative PET Assessment Methods in Association with Physician Assessment of Clinical Disease Activity
Descriptive statistic GLMM evaluation Parameter Clinical active (mean ± SEM) Clinical remission (mean ± SEM) AUC (95% CI) Optimal cutoff P AIC LVV (n) 75 131 SUVArtery 3.43 ± 0.13 3.11 ± 0.09 0.59 (0.51–0.68) 3.58 0.0293 255.2 TBRLiver 1.46 ± 0.06 1.27 ± 0.03 0.66 (0.58–0.73) 1.46 0.0002 253.1 TBRBlood 2.60 ± 0.09 2.31 ± 0.06 0.65 (0.57–0.73) 2.39 0.0003 254.7 PETVAS 20.6 ± 0.56 17.3 ± 0.55 0.65 (0.57–0.73) 22.5 0.0004 239.5 GLMM = generalized linear mixed model.
- TABLE 4
Correlation of Semiquantitative and Qualitative PET Assessment Methods to Acute-Phase Reactants (CRP and ESR)
CRP ESR Spearman r P Spearman r P SUVArtery 0.19 <0.01 0.14 0.04 TBRLiver 0.20 <0.01 0.15 0.03 TBRBlood 0.11 0.14 0.02 0.78 PETVAS 0.08 0.29 0.08 0.27 CRP = C-reactive protein; ESR = erythrocyte sedimentation rate.
In this issue
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- Validation and reproducibility of mapping positron emission tomography uptake in the aortic wall and thrombus
- EULAR recommendations for the use of imaging in large vessel vasculitis in clinical practice: 2023 update
- Imaging in diagnosis, monitoring and outcome prediction of large vessel vasculitis: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis informing the 2023 update of the EULAR recommendations