Dataset Information

Comparison of Image Quality and Quantification Parameters between Q.Clear and OSEM Reconstruction Methods on FDG-PET/CT Images in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer.

ABSTRACT: We compared the image quality and quantification parameters through bayesian penalized likelihood reconstruction algorithm (Q.Clear) and ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) algorithm for 2-[¹⁸F]FDG-PET/CT scans performed for response monitoring in patients with metastatic breast cancer in prospective setting. We included 37 metastatic breast cancer patients diagnosed and monitored with 2-[¹⁸F]FDG-PET/CT at Odense University Hospital (Denmark). A total of 100 scans were analyzed blinded toward Q.Clear and OSEM reconstruction algorithms regarding image quality parameters (noise, sharpness, contrast, diagnostic confidence, artefacts, and blotchy appearance) using a five-point scale. The hottest lesion was selected in scans with measurable disease, considering the same volume of interest in both reconstruction methods. SUL_peak (g/mL) and SUV_max (g/mL) were compared for the same hottest lesion. There was no significant difference regarding noise, diagnostic confidence, and artefacts within reconstruction methods; Q.Clear had significantly better sharpness (p < 0.001) and contrast (p = 0.001) than the OSEM reconstruction, while the OSEM reconstruction had significantly less blotchy appearance compared with Q.Clear reconstruction (p < 0.001). Quantitative analysis on 75/100 scans indicated that Q.Clear reconstruction had significantly higher SUL_peak (5.33 ± 2.8 vs. 4.85 ± 2.5, p < 0.001) and SUV_max (8.27 ± 4.8 vs. 6.90 ± 3.8, p < 0.001) compared with OSEM reconstruction. In conclusion, Q.Clear reconstruction revealed better sharpness, better contrast, higher SUV_max, and higher SUL_peak, while OSEM reconstruction had less blotchy appearance.

SUBMITTER: Naghavi-Behzad M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10058454 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of Image Quality and Quantification Parameters between Q.Clear and OSEM Reconstruction Methods on FDG-PET/CT Images in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Naghavi-Behzad Mohammad M Vogsen Marianne M Gerke Oke O Dahlsgaard-Wallenius Sara Elisabeth SE Nissen Henriette Juel HJ Jakobsen Nick Møldrup NM Braad Poul-Erik PE Vilstrup Mie Holm MH Deak Paul P Hildebrandt Malene Grubbe MG Andersen Thomas Lund TL

Journal of imaging 20230309 3

We compared the image quality and quantification parameters through bayesian penalized likelihood reconstruction algorithm (Q.Clear) and ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) algorithm for 2-[<sup>18</sup>F]FDG-PET/CT scans performed for response monitoring in patients with metastatic breast cancer in prospective setting. We included 37 metastatic breast cancer patients diagnosed and monitored with 2-[<sup>18</sup>F]FDG-PET/CT at Odense University Hospital (Denmark). A total of 100 scan ...[more]

PMID: 36976116

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeFor pediatric lymphoma, quantitative FDG PET/CT imaging features such as metabolic tumor volume (MTV) are important for prognosis and risk stratification strategies. However, feature extraction is difficult and time-consuming in cases of high disease burden. The purpose of this study was to fully automate the measurement of PET imaging features in PET/CT images of pediatric lymphoma.Methods18F-FDG PET/CT baseline images of 100 pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma patients were retrospectively analyzed. Two nuclear medicine physicians identified and segmented FDG avid disease using PET thresholding methods. Both PET and CT images were used as inputs to a three-dimensional patch-based, multi-resolution pathway convolutional neural network architecture, DeepMedic. The model was trained to replicate physician segmentations using an ensemble of three networks trained with 5-fold cross-validation. The maximum SUV (SUVmax), MTV, total lesion glycolysis (TLG), surface-area-to-volume ratio (SA/MTV), and a measure of disease spread (Dmaxpatient) were extracted from the model output. Pearson's correlation coefficient and relative percent differences were calculated between automated and physician-extracted features.ResultsMedian Dice similarity coefficient of patient contours between automated and physician contours was 0.86 (IQR 0.78-0.91). Automated SUVmax values matched exactly the physician determined values in 81/100 cases, with Pearson's correlation coefficient (R) of 0.95. Automated MTV was strongly correlated with physician MTV (R = 0.88), though it was slightly underestimated with a median (IQR) relative difference of - 4.3% (- 10.0-5.7%). Agreement of TLG was excellent (R = 0.94), with median (IQR) relative difference of - 0.4% (- 5.2-7.0%). Median relative percent differences were 6.8% (R = 0.91; IQR 1.6-4.3%) for SA/MTV, and 4.5% (R = 0.51; IQR - 7.5-40.9%) for Dmaxpatient, which was the most difficult feature to quantify automatically.ConclusionsAn automated method using an ensemble of multi-resolution pathway 3D CNNs was able to quantify PET imaging features of lymphoma on baseline FDG PET/CT images with excellent agreement to reference physician PET segmentation. Automated methods with faster throughput for PET quantitation, such as MTV and TLG, show promise in more accessible clinical and research applications.

Project description:ObjectiveSimultaneous PET/MRIs vary in their quantitative PET performance due to inherent differences in the physical systems and differences in the image reconstruction implementation. This variability in quantitative accuracy confounds the ability to meaningfully combine and compare data across scanners. In this work, we define image reconstruction parameters that lead to comparable contrast recovery curves across simultaneous PET/MRI systems.MethodThe NEMA NU-2 image quality phantom was imaged on one GE Signa and on one Siemens mMR PET/MRI scanner. The phantom was imaged at 9.7:1 contrast with standard spheres (diameter 10, 13, 17, 22, 28, 37 mm) and with custom spheres (diameter: 8.5, 11.5, 15, 25, 32.5, 44 mm) using a standardized methodology. Analysis was performed on a 30 min listmode data acquisition and on 6 realizations of 5 min from the listmode data. Images were reconstructed with the manufacturer provided iterative image reconstruction algorithms with and without point spread function (PSF) modeling. For both scanners, a post-reconstruction Gaussian filter of 3-7 mm in steps of 1 mm was applied. Attenuation correction was provided from a scaled computed tomography (CT) image of the phantom registered to the MR-based attenuation images and verified to align on the non-attenuation corrected PET images. For each of these image reconstruction parameter sets, contrast recovery coefficients (CRCs) were determined for the SUVmean, SUVmax and SUVpeak for each sphere. A hybrid metric combining the root-mean-squared discrepancy (RMSD) and the absolute CRC values was used to simultaneously optimize for best match in CRC between the two scanners while simultaneously weighting toward higher resolution reconstructions. The image reconstruction parameter set was identified as the best candidate reconstruction for each vendor for harmonized PET image reconstruction.ResultsThe range of clinically relevant image reconstruction parameters demonstrated widely different quantitative performance across cameras. The best match of CRC curves was obtained at the lowest RMSD values with: for CRCmean, 2 iterations-7 mm filter on the GE Signa and 4 iterations-6 mm filter on the Siemens mMR, for CRCmax, 4 iterations-6 mm filter on the GE Signa, 4 iterations-5 mm filter on the Siemens mMR and for CRCpeak, 4 iterations-7 mm filter with PSF on the GE Signa and 4 iterations-7 mm filter on the Siemens mMR. Over all reconstructions, the RMSD between CRCs was 1.8%, 3.6% and 2.9% for CRC mean, max and peak, respectively. The solution of 2 iterations-3 mm on the GE Signa and 4 iterations-3 mm on Siemens mMR, both with PSF, led to simultaneous harmonization and with high CRC and low RMSD for CRC mean, max and peak with RMSD values of 2.8%, 5.8% and 3.2%, respectively.ConclusionsFor two commercially available PET/MRI scanners, user-selectable parameters that control iterative updates, image smoothing and PSF modeling provide a range of contrast recovery curves that allow harmonization in harmonization strategies of optimal match in CRC or high CRC values. This work demonstrates that nearly identical CRC curves can be obtained on different commercially available scanners by selecting appropriate image reconstruction parameters.

Project description:Background New-generation silicon-photomultiplier (SiPM)-based PET/CT systems exhibit an improved lesion detectability and image quality due to a higher detector sensitivity. Consequently, the acquisition time can be reduced while maintaining diagnostic quality. The aim of this study was to determine the lowest 18F-FDG PET acquisition time without loss of diagnostic information and to optimise image reconstruction parameters (image reconstruction algorithm, number of iterations, voxel size, Gaussian filter) by phantom imaging. Moreover, patient data are evaluated to confirm the phantom results. Methods Three phantoms were used: a soft-tissue tumour phantom, a bone-lung tumour phantom, and a resolution phantom. Phantom conditions (lesion sizes from 6.5 mm to 28.8 mm in diameter, lesion activity concentration of 15 kBq/mL, and signal-to-background ratio of 5:1) were derived from patient data. PET data were acquired on an SiPM-based Biograph Vision PET/CT system for 10 min in list-mode format and resampled into time frames from 30 to 300 s in 30-s increments to simulate different acquisition times. Different image reconstructions with varying iterations, voxel sizes, and Gaussian filters were probed. Contrast-to-noise-ratio (CNR), maximum, and peak signal were evaluated using the 10-min acquisition time image as reference. A threshold CNR value ≥ 5 and a maximum (peak) deviation of ± 20% were considered acceptable. 20 patient data sets were evaluated regarding lesion quantification as well as agreement and correlation between reduced and full acquisition time standard uptake values (assessed by Pearson correlation coefficient, intraclass correlation coefficient, Bland–Altman analyses, and Krippendorff’s alpha). Results An acquisition time of 60 s per bed position yielded acceptable detectability and quantification results for clinically relevant phantom lesions ≥ 9.7 mm in diameter using OSEM-TOF or OSEM-TOF+PSF image reconstruction, a 4-mm Gaussian filter, and a 1.65 × 1.65 x 2.00-mm3 or 3.30 × 3.30 x 3.00-mm3 voxel size. Correlation and agreement of patient lesion quantification between full and reduced acquisition times were excellent. Conclusion A threefold reduction in acquisition time is possible. Patients might benefit from more comfortable examinations or reduced radiation exposure, if instead of the acquisition time the applied activity is reduced. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09993-4.

Project description:UnlabelledQ.Clear, a Bayesian penalized-likelihood reconstruction algorithm for PET, was recently introduced by GE Healthcare on their PET scanners to improve clinical image quality and quantification. In this work, we determined the optimum penalization factor (beta) for clinical use of Q.Clear and compared Q.Clear with standard PET reconstructions.MethodsA National Electrical Manufacturers Association image-quality phantom was scanned on a time-of-flight PET/CT scanner and reconstructed using ordered-subset expectation maximization (OSEM), OSEM with point-spread function (PSF) modeling, and the Q.Clear algorithm (which also includes PSF modeling). Q.Clear was investigated for β (B) values of 100-1,000. Contrast recovery (CR) and background variability (BV) were measured from 3 repeated scans, reconstructed with the different algorithms. Fifteen oncology body (18)F-FDG PET/CT scans were reconstructed using OSEM, OSEM PSF, and Q.Clear using B values of 200, 300, 400, and 500. These were visually analyzed by 2 scorers and scored by rank against a panel of parameters (overall image quality; background liver, mediastinum, and marrow image quality; noise level; and lesion detectability).ResultsAs β is increased, the CR and BV decreases; Q.Clear generally gives a higher CR and lower BV than OSEM. For the smallest sphere reconstructed with Q.Clear B400, CR is 28.4% and BV 4.2%, with corresponding values for OSEM of 24.7% and 5.0%. For the largest hot sphere, Q.Clear B400 yields a CR of 75.2% and a BV of 3.8%, with corresponding values for OSEM of 64.4% and 4.0%. Scorer 1 and 2 ranked B400 as the preferred reconstruction in 13 of 15 (87%) and 10 of 15 (73%) cases. The least preferred reconstruction was OSEM PSF in all cases. In most cases, lesion detectability was highest ranked for B200, in 9 of 15 (67%) and 10 of 15 (73%), with OSEM PSF ranked lowest. Poor lesion detectability on OSEM PSF was seen in cases of mildly (18)F-FDG-avid mediastinal nodes in lung cancer and small liver metastases due to background noise. Conversely, OSEM PSF was ranked second highest for lesion detectability in most pulmonary nodule evaluation cases. The combined scores confirmed B400 to be the preferred reconstruction.ConclusionOur phantom measurement results demonstrate improved CR and reduced BV when using Q.Clear instead of OSEM. A β value of 400 is recommended for oncology body PET/CT using Q.Clear.

Project description:The aim of this prospective investigation was to assess the association of parameters derived from baseline (18)F-FDG PET/CT with overall survival (OS) in men with castrate-resistant metastatic prostate cancer.Eighty-seven men with castrate-resistant metastatic prostate cancer underwent (18)F-FDG PET/CT and were followed prospectively for OS. Median follow-up in patients who were alive was 22.2 mo (range, 1.6-62.5 mo). OS was defined as the time between the PET/CT imaging or the start of chemotherapy, whichever was later, and death, with patients who were alive censored at the last follow-up date. PET parameters included maximum standardized uptake value (SUV(max)) of the most active lesion, sum of SUV(max), and average SUV(max) of all metabolically active lesions, after subtraction of patient-specific background-liver average SUV. Comparison of OS was based on univariate and multivariable Cox regression analyses of continuous PET parameters adjusted for standard clinical parameters (age, serum prostate-specific antigen level, alkaline phosphatase, use of pain medication, prior chemotherapy, and Gleason score at initial diagnosis). Survival curves based on Kaplan-Meier estimates are presented.Among the 87 patients, 61 were dead at the time of last follow-up. Median OS was 16.5 mo (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.1-23.4 mo), and the OS probability at 24 mo was 39% ± 6%. For the univariate analysis, the hazard ratios associated with each unit increase were 1.01 (95% CI, 1.006-1.02) for sum of SUV(max) (P = 0.002), 1.11 (95% CI, 1.03-1.18) for maximum SUV(max) (P = 0.010), and 1.13 (95% CI, 0.99-1.30) for average SUV(max) (P = 0.095). For the multivariable analysis adjusting for relevant clinical parameters, the continuous parameter sum of SUV(max) remained significant (P = 0.053), with a hazard ratio of 1.01 (95% CI, 1.001-1.02). When sum of SUV(max) was grouped into quartile ranges, there was poorer survival probability for the patients in the fourth-quartile range than for those in the first-quartile range, with a univariate hazard ratio of 3.8 (95% CI, 1.8-7.9).Sum of SUV(max) derived from (18)F-FDG PET/CT contributes independent prognostic information on OS in men with castrate-resistant metastatic prostate cancer, and this information may be useful in assessing the comparative effectiveness of various conventional and emerging treatment strategies.

Project description:BackgroundRespiratory motions may cause artifacts on positron emission tomography (PET) images that degrade image quality and quantification accuracy. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of a respiratory motion-corrected image reconstruction (MCIR) algorithm on image quality and tumor quantification compared with nongated/nonmotion-corrected reconstruction.MethodsWe used a phantom consisting of 5 motion spheres immersed in a chamber driven by a motor. The spheres and the background chamber were filled with 18F solution at a sphere-to-background ratio of 5:1. We enrolled 42 and 16 patients undergoing 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose {2-[18F]FDG} and 68Ga-labeled [1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7,10-tetraacetic acid]-1-Nal3-octreotide {[68Ga]Ga-DOTA-NOC} PET/computed tomography (CT) from whom 74 and 30 lesions were segmented, respectively. Three reconstructions were performed: data-driven gating-based motion correction (DDGMC), external vital signal module-based motion correction (VSMMC), and noncorrection reconstruction. The standardized uptake values (SUVs) and the volume of the spheres and the lesions were measured and compared among the 3 reconstruction groups. The image noise in the liver was measured, and the visual image quality of motion artifacts was scored by radiologists in the patient study.ResultsIn the phantom study, the spheres' SUVs increased by 26-36%, and the volumes decreased by 35-38% in DDGMC and VSMMC compared with the noncorrection group. In the 2-[18F]FDG PET patient study, the lesions' SUVs had a median increase of 10.87-12.65% while the volumes had a median decrease of 14.88-15.18% in DDGMC and VSMMC compared with those of noncorrection. In the [68Ga]Ga-DOTA-NOC PET patient study, the lesions' SUVs increased by 14.23-15.45%, and the volumes decreased by 19.11-20.94% in DDGMC and VSMMC. The image noise in the liver was equal between the DDGMC, VSMMC, and noncorrection groups. Radiologists found improved image quality in more than 45% of the cases in DDGMC and VSMMC compared with the noncorrection group. There was no statistically significant difference in SUVs, volumes, or visual image quality scores between DDGMC and VSMMC.ConclusionsMCIR improves tumor quantification accuracy and visual image quality by reducing respiratory motion artifacts without compromised image noise performance or elongated acquisition time in 2-[18F]FDG and [68Ga]Ga-DOTA-NOC PET/CT tumor imaging. The performance of DDG-driven MCIR is as good as that of the external device-driven solution.

Dataset Information

Comparison of Image Quality and Quantification Parameters between Q.Clear and OSEM Reconstruction Methods on FDG-PET/CT Images in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Publications

Comparison of Image Quality and Quantification Parameters between Q.Clear and OSEM Reconstruction Methods on FDG-PET/CT Images in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets