Display options
Cite
Sanghera B, Wood K, Sonoda LI, et al. Pre-klinik Pozitron Emisyon Tomografisi Rekonstrüksiyon Algoritmasının Cu-64 ATSM Lezyon Hipoksisi Üzerine Etkisi. Pre-clinical Positron Emission Tomography Reconstruction Algorithm Effect on Cu-64 ATSM Lesion Hypoxia. Mol Imaging Radionucl Ther. 2016;25(1):19-25doi: 10.4274/mirt.18189.
Sanghera, B., Wood, K., Sonoda, L. I., Gogbashian, A., Lowe, G., Nunes, A., Stirling, J., Shepherd, C., Beynon, G., & Wong, W. L. (2016). Pre-klinik Pozitron Emisyon Tomografisi Rekonstrüksiyon Algoritmasının Cu-64 ATSM Lezyon Hipoksisi Üzerine Etkisi. Pre-clinical Positron Emission Tomography Reconstruction Algorithm Effect on Cu-64 ATSM Lesion Hypoxia. Molecular imaging and radionuclide therapy, 25(1), 19-25. https://doi.org/10.4274/mirt.18189
Sanghera, Bal, et al. "Pre-klinik Pozitron Emisyon Tomografisi Rekonstrüksiyon Algoritmasının Cu-64 ATSM Lezyon Hipoksisi Üzerine Etkisi." Pre-clinical Positron Emission Tomography Reconstruction Algorithm Effect on Cu-64 ATSM Lesion Hypoxia. Molecular imaging and radionuclide therapy vol. 25,1 (2016): 19-25. doi: https://doi.org/10.4274/mirt.18189
Sanghera B, Wood K, Sonoda LI, Gogbashian A, Lowe G, Nunes A, Stirling J, Shepherd C, Beynon G, Wong WL. Pre-klinik Pozitron Emisyon Tomografisi Rekonstrüksiyon Algoritmasının Cu-64 ATSM Lezyon Hipoksisi Üzerine Etkisi. Pre-clinical Positron Emission Tomography Reconstruction Algorithm Effect on Cu-64 ATSM Lesion Hypoxia. Mol Imaging Radionucl Ther. 2016 Feb 05;25(1):19-25. doi: 10.4274/mirt.18189. PMID: 27299284; PMCID: PMC4807345.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Mol Imaging Radionucl Ther. 2016 Feb 05;25(1):19-25. doi: 10.4274/mirt.18189.

Pre-clinical Positron Emission Tomography Reconstruction Algorithm Effect on Cu-64 ATSM Lesion Hypoxia.

Molecular imaging and radionuclide therapy

Bal Sanghera, Katie Wood, Luke I Sonoda, Andrew Gogbashian, Gerry Lowe, Andre Nunes, James Stirling, Chris Shepherd, Gwen Beynon, Wai Lup Wong

Affiliations

  1. Mount Vernon Hospital, Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Northwood, UK, Phone: +90 192 384 43 92 E-mail: [email protected].

PMID: 27299284 PMCID: PMC4807345 DOI: 10.4274/mirt.18189

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Application of distinct positron emission tomography (PET) scan reconstruction algorithms can lead to statistically significant differences in measuring lesion functional properties. We looked at the influence of two-dimensional filtered back projection (2D FBP), two-dimensional ordered subset expectation maximization (2D OSEM), three-dimensional ordered subset expectation maximization (3D OSEM) without 3D maximum a posteriori and with (3D OSEM MAP) on lesion hypoxia tracer uptake using a pre-clinical PET scanner.

METHODS: Reconstructed images of a rodent tumor model bearing P22 carcinosarcoma injected with hypoxia tracer Copper-64-Diacetyl-bis (N4-methylthiosemicarbazone) (i.e. Cu-64 ATSM) were analyzed at 10 minute intervals till 60 minute post injection. Lesion maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) and SUVmax/background SUVmean (T/B) were recorded and investigated after application of multiple algorithm and reconstruction parameters to assess their influence on Cu-64 ATSM measurements and associated trends over time.

RESULTS: SUVmax exhibited convergence for OSEM reconstructions while ANOVA results showed a significant difference in SUVmax or T/B between 2D FBP, 2D OSEM, 3D OSEM and 3D OSEM MAP reconstructions across all time frames. SUVmax and T/B were greatest in magnitude for 2D OSEM followed by 3D OSEM MAP, 3D OSEM and then 2D FBP at all time frames respectively. Similarly SUVmax and T/B standard deviations (SD) were lowest for 2D OSEM in comparison with other algorithms.

CONCLUSION: Significantly higher magnitude lesion SUVmax and T/B combined with lower SD were observed using 2D OSEM reconstruction in comparison with 2D FBP, 3D OSEM and 3D OSEM MAP algorithms at all time frames. Results are consistent with other published studies however more specimens are required for full validation.

References

  1. Science. 1956 Feb 24;123(3191):309-14 - PubMed
  2. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2007 Jun;26(2):225-39 - PubMed
  3. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013 Sep;57(3):235-43 - PubMed
  4. Radiat Oncol. 2014 Oct 16;9:228 - PubMed
  5. BMJ. 1998 Nov 14;317(7169):1370-3 - PubMed
  6. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008 Aug;35(8):1544-9 - PubMed
  7. J Nucl Med. 2014 Mar;55(3):515-21 - PubMed
  8. J Nucl Med. 2008 Nov;49(11):1862-8 - PubMed
  9. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:786463 - PubMed
  10. Dalton Trans. 2013 Sep 7;42(33):12005-14 - PubMed
  11. Radiother Oncol. 2014 Nov;113(2):210-4 - PubMed
  12. Front Med (Lausanne). 2015 Mar 23;2:18 - PubMed
  13. Nat Rev Cancer. 2011 Jun;11(6):393-410 - PubMed
  14. J Nucl Med Technol. 2013 Dec;41(4):268-73 - PubMed
  15. Phys Med Biol. 2013 Mar 7;58(5):1465-78 - PubMed
  16. J Nucl Med. 2008 Jun;49 Suppl 2:129S-48S - PubMed
  17. J Nucl Med Technol. 2012 Sep;40(3):157-65 - PubMed

Publication Types