Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Test-Retest Variability of Various Quantitative Measures to Characterize Tracer Uptake and/or Tracer Uptake Heterogeneity in Metastasized Liver for Patients with Colorectal Carcinoma

  • Brief Article
  • Published:
Molecular Imaging and Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to assess test-retest variability of various quantitative measures to characterize tracer uptake and/or tracer uptake heterogeneity.

Procedures

Two baseline whole-body 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-d-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (CT) scans were acquired in 29 subjects with colorectal carcinoma. Whole liver volumes of interest (VOI) were defined manually on CT. For each VOI, various quantitative measures were determined, e.g., skewness, kurtosis, and the area under a cumulative standardized uptake value-volume histogram (AUC).

Results

AUC showed a good reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC): 0.97) and low test-retest variability (10 %). Most other quantitative parameters showed excellent agreement between test and retest values (ICC: 0.78–0.97) and low test-retest variability (<12 %), except for kurtosis. Skewness also showed a higher test-retest variability (19 %), but good ICC (0.96) and it correlated well with AUC (R 2: 0.90, all others: <0.76).

Conclusion

This high reproducibility and reliability of AUC warrant further investigation of its use for quantification of tracer uptake heterogeneity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM et al (2011) Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 61:69–90

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. de Geus-Oei LF, Ruers TJ, Punt CJ et al (2006) FDG-PET in colorectal cancer. Cancer Imaging 6:S71–S81

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Boellaard R, Krak NC, Hoekstra OS, Lammertsma AA (2004) Effects of noise, image resolution, and ROI definition on the accuracy of standard uptake values: a simulation study. J Nucl Med 45:1519–1527

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. El Naqa I, Grigsby P, Apte A et al (2009) Exploring feature-based approaches in PET images for predicting cancer treatment outcomes. Pattern Recognit 42:1162–1171

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. El Naqa I, Bradley J, Guild C et al (2008) Pattern recognition analysis of FDG-PET uptake characteristics for assessing response in NSCLC post-radiotherapy treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 72:S113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. van Velden FH, Cheebsumon P, Yaqub M et al (2011) Evaluation of a cumulative SUV-volume histogram method for parameterizing heterogeneous intratumoural FDG uptake in non-small cell lung cancer PET studies. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 38:1636–1647

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Watabe T, Tatsumi M, Watabe H et al (2012) Intratumoral heterogeneity of F-18 FDG uptake differentiates between gastrointestinal stromal tumors and abdominal malignant lymphomas on PET/CT. Ann Nucl Med 26:222–227

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Velasquez LM, Boellaard R, Kollia G et al (2009) Repeatability of 18F-FDG PET in a multicenter phase I study of patients with advanced gastrointestinal malignancies. J Nucl Med 50:1646–1654

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Boellaard R, O'Doherty MJ, Weber WA et al (2010) FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 37:181–200

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge MA (2009) From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med 50(Suppl 1):122S–150S

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Frings V, de Langen AJ, Smit EF et al (2010) Repeatability of metabolically active volume measurements with 18F-FDG and 18F-FLT PET in non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med 51:1870–1877

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Heijmen L, de Geus-Oei LF, de Wilt JH et al (2012) Reproducibility of functional volume and activity concentration in 18F-FDG PET/CT of liver metastases in colorectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 39:1858–1867

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cheng G, Alavi A, Lim E et al (2013) Dynamic changes of FDG uptake and clearance in normal tissues. Mol Imaging Biol 15:345–352

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Paquet N, Albert A, Foidart J, Hustinx R (2004) Within-patient variability of (18)F-FDG: standardized uptake values in normal tissues. J Nucl Med 45:784–788

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was performed within the framework of CTMM, the Center for Translational Molecular Medicine, AIRFORCE project (grant 03O-103).

Conflict of Interest

L.M. Velasquez and W. Hayes are employed by Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057,, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Floris H. P. van Velden, Ida A. Nissen, Femke Jongsma, Adriaan A. Lammertsma, Otto S. Hoekstra & Ronald Boellaard

  2. Discovery Medicine and Clinical Pharmacology, Bristol-Myers Squibb Co, Princeton, NJ, USA

    Linda M. Velasquez & Wendy Hayes

Authors
  1. Floris H. P. van Velden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ida A. Nissen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Femke Jongsma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Linda M. Velasquez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Wendy Hayes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Adriaan A. Lammertsma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Otto S. Hoekstra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Ronald Boellaard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Floris H. P. van Velden.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

van Velden, F.H.P., Nissen, I.A., Jongsma, F. et al. Test-Retest Variability of Various Quantitative Measures to Characterize Tracer Uptake and/or Tracer Uptake Heterogeneity in Metastasized Liver for Patients with Colorectal Carcinoma. Mol Imaging Biol 16, 13–18 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-013-0660-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-013-0660-9

Key words

Search

Navigation