Suppr超能文献

临床实践中的定量PET/CT:使用不同临床阅片平台评估PET肿瘤指标的一致性

Quantitative PET/CT in clinical practice: assessing the agreement of PET tumor indices using different clinical reading platforms.

作者信息

Mhlanga Joyce C, Chirindel Alin, Lodge Martin A, Wahl Richard L, Subramaniam Rathan M

机构信息

The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.

Department of Radiology, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.

出版信息

Nucl Med Commun. 2018 Feb;39(2):154-160. doi: 10.1097/MNM.0000000000000786.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine whether various fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT-derived parameters used in oncology vary significantly depending on the interpretation software systems used in clinical practice for multiple human solid tumors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 120 fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT studies carried out in patients with pancreatic, lung, colorectal, and head and neck cancers were evaluated retrospectively on two different vendor software platforms including Mirada and MIMVista. Regions of interest were placed on the liver to determine the liver mean standardized uptake value at lean body mass (SUL) and on each tumor to determine the SULmax, SULpeak. Total lesion glycolysis (TLG) and metabolic tumor volume (MTV) were determined using fixed thresholds of 50% of SULmax and SULpeak. Inter-reader, intersystem intraclass correlations, systematic bias, and variability reflected by the 95% limits of agreement, and precision were determined.

RESULTS

There was excellent inter-reader reliability between the readers and the two software systems, with intraclass correlations more than 0.9 for all PET metrics, with P values less than 0.0001. The bias and SD on Bland-Altman analysis between the two software platforms for tumor SULmax, SULpeak, Max50MTV, and Peak50MTV, respectively, for Reader 1 were -1.52±2.24, 0.80±3.67, -0.80±13.01, and -4.49±20.6. For Reader 2, the biases were -1.62±1.95, 0.18±3.60, -0.27±4.64, and -3.13±8.30. The precision between the two systems was better for SULmax and SULpeak, with less variance observed, than for volume-based metrics such as Max50MTV and Peak50MTV or TLG.

CONCLUSION

Excellent correlation has been found between two tested software reading platforms for all PET-derived metrics in a dual-reader analysis. Overall, the SULmax and SULpeak values had less bias and better precision compared with the MTV and TLG.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在确定肿瘤学中使用的各种氟-18-氟脱氧葡萄糖PET/CT衍生参数是否会因临床实践中用于多种人类实体瘤的解读软件系统不同而有显著差异。

患者与方法

对120例胰腺癌、肺癌、结直肠癌和头颈癌患者进行的氟-18-氟脱氧葡萄糖PET/CT检查进行回顾性评估,使用包括Mirada和MIMVista在内的两个不同供应商的软件平台。在肝脏上放置感兴趣区以确定瘦体重时的肝脏平均标准化摄取值(SUL),在每个肿瘤上放置感兴趣区以确定最大SUL(SULmax)、峰值SUL(SULpeak)。使用SULmax和SULpeak的50%的固定阈值确定总病变糖酵解(TLG)和代谢肿瘤体积(MTV)。确定读者间、系统间的组内相关性、系统偏差以及由95%一致性界限反映的变异性和精密度。

结果

读者与两个软件系统之间存在出色的读者间可靠性,所有PET指标的组内相关性均超过0.9,P值小于0.0001。对于读者1,两个软件平台之间在肿瘤SULmax、SULpeak、Max50MTV和Peak50MTV方面的Bland-Altman分析中的偏差和标准差分别为-1.52±2.24、0.80±3.67、-0.80±13.01和-4.49±20.6。对于读者2,偏差分别为-1.62±1.95、0.18±3.60、-0.27±4.64和-3.13±8.30。与基于体积的指标(如Max50MTV和Peak50MTV或TLG)相比,两个系统之间对于SULmax和SULpeak的精密度更好,观察到的方差更小。

结论

在双读者分析中,两个测试的软件阅读平台对于所有PET衍生指标均发现有出色的相关性。总体而言,与MTV和TLG相比,SULmax和SULpeak值的偏差更小且精密度更好。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验