Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Evaluation of PET quantitation accuracy among multiple discovery IQ PET/CT systems via NEMA image quality test
Author: Vallot, Delphine
Ponti, Elena De
Morzenti, Sabrina
Gramek, Anna
Pieczonka, Anna
Reynés-Llompart, Gabriel
Siennicki, Jakub
Deak, Paul
Dutta, Chiranjib
Uribe, Jorge
Caselles, Olivier
Keywords: Oncologia
Marcadors bioquímics
Biochemical markers
Issue Date: 12-Jan-2020
Publisher: Springer
Abstract: Introduction: Quantitative imaging biomarkers are becoming usual in oncology for assessing therapy response. The harmonization of image quantitation reporting has become of utmost importance due to the multi-center trials increase. The NEMA image quality test is often considered for the evaluation of quantitation and is more accurate with a radioactive solid phantom that reduces variability. The goal of this project is to determine the level of variability among imaging centers if acquisition and imaging protocol parameters are left to the center's preference while all other parameters are fixed including the scanner type. Methods: A NEMA-IQ phantom filled with radioactive Ge-68 solid resin was imaged in five clinical sites throughout Europe. Sites reconstructed data with OSEM and BSREM algorithms applying the sites' clinical parameters. Images were analyzed according with the NEMA-NU2-2012 standard using the manufacturer-provided NEMA tools to calculate contrast recovery (CR) and background variability (BV) for each sphere and the lung error (LE) estimation. In addition, a F-18-filled NEMA-IQ phantom was also evaluated to obtain a gauge for variability among centers when the sites were provided with identical specific instructions for acquisition and reconstruction protocol (the aggregate of data from 12 additional sites is presented). Results: The data using the Ge-68 solid phantom showed no statistical differences among different sites, proving a very good reproducibility among the PET center models even if dispersion of data is higher with OSEM compared to BSREM. Furthermore, BSREM shows better CR and comparable BV, while LE is slightly reduced. Two centers exhibit significant differences in CR and BV values for the F-18 NEMA NU2-2012 experiments; these outlier results are explained. Conclusion: The same PET system type from the various sites produced similar quantitative results, despite allowing each site to choose their clinical protocols with no restriction on data acquisition and reconstruction parameters. BSREM leads to lower dispersion of quantitative data among different sites. A solid radioactive phantom may be recommended to qualify the sites to perform quantitative imaging.
Note: Reproducció del document publicat a:
It is part of: Ejnmmi Physics, 2020, vol. 7
Related resource:
Appears in Collections:Articles publicats en revistes (Institut d'lnvestigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL))

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
VallotD.pdf1.18 MBAdobe PDFView/Open

This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons