LITIS Laboratory EA 4108-QUANT.I.F, University of Rouen, Rouen, France. Siemens Medical Solutions, Bobigny, France.
Phys Med Biol. 2009 Nov 21;54(22):6901-16. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/54/22/010. Epub 2009 Oct 28.
An iterative generic algorithm has been developed to compare three thresholding models used to delineate gross tumour volume on (18)F-FDG PET images. 3D volume was extracted and characteristic parameters were measured. Three fitting models using different parameters were studied: model 1 (volume, contrast), model 2 (contrast) and model 3 (SUV). The calibration was performed using a cylindrical phantom filled with hot spheres. To validate the models, two other phantoms were used. The calibration procedure showed a better fitting model for model 1 (R(2) from 0.94 to 1.00) than for model 3 (0.95) and model 2 (0.69). The validation study shows that model 3 yielded large volume measurement errors. Models 1 and 2 gave close results with no significant differences. Model 2 was preferred because it presents less error dispersion and needs fewer characteristic parameters, making it easier to implement. Our results show the importance of developing a generic algorithm to compare the performances of fitting models objectively and to validate results on other phantoms than the ones used during the calibration process to avoid methodological biases.
已经开发出一种迭代通用算法,用于比较用于在(18)F-FDG PET 图像上描绘大体肿瘤体积的三种阈值模型。提取了 3D 体积并测量了特征参数。研究了使用不同参数的三种拟合模型:模型 1(体积,对比度)、模型 2(对比度)和模型 3(SUV)。使用圆柱形模体填充热球进行校准。为了验证模型,还使用了另外两个模体。校准程序表明,模型 1(R(2)从 0.94 到 1.00)的拟合模型优于模型 3(0.95)和模型 2(0.69)。验证研究表明,模型 3 导致体积测量误差较大。模型 1 和 2 给出了接近的结果,没有显著差异。由于模型 2 误差分散较小,需要的特征参数较少,因此更容易实现,因此被优先采用。我们的结果表明,开发一种通用算法来客观地比较拟合模型的性能以及在除了校准过程中使用的模体之外的其他模体上验证结果非常重要,以避免方法学偏差。