Academic Radiology
Volume 17, Issue 4 , Pages 479-488 , April 2010

Computer-Assisted Quantitative Evaluation of Therapeutic Responses for Lymphoma Using Serial PET/CT Imaging

  • Xin Gao, PhD

      Affiliations

    • The Center for Bioengineering and Informatics, The Methodist Hospital and The Methodist Hospital Research Institute, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, 6565 Fannin ST, B5-018, Houston, TX 77030
    • ,
  • Zhong Xue, PhD

      Affiliations

    • The Center for Bioengineering and Informatics, The Methodist Hospital and The Methodist Hospital Research Institute, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, 6565 Fannin ST, B5-018, Houston, TX 77030
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress correspondence to: Z.X.
    • ,
  • Jiong Xing, MD

      Affiliations

    • The Center for Bioengineering and Informatics, The Methodist Hospital and The Methodist Hospital Research Institute, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, 6565 Fannin ST, B5-018, Houston, TX 77030
    • ,
  • Daniel Y. Lee, MD PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, The Methodist Hospital and The Methodist Hospital Research Institute, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, 6565 Fannin ST, B5-018, Houston, TX 77030
    • ,
  • Stephen M. Gottschalk, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Pediatrics, Section of Hematology/Oncology, Texas Children's Hospital, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
    • ,
  • Helen E. Heslop, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Pediatrics, Section of Hematology/Oncology, Texas Children's Hospital, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
    • ,
  • Catherine M. Bollard, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Pediatrics, Section of Hematology/Oncology, Texas Children's Hospital, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
    • ,
  • Stephen T.C. Wong, PhD

      Affiliations

    • The Center for Bioengineering and Informatics, The Methodist Hospital and The Methodist Hospital Research Institute, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, 6565 Fannin ST, B5-018, Houston, TX 77030

Received 2 September 2009 ,Accepted 27 October 2009.

References 

  1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics, 2008. CA Cancer J Clin. 2008;58:71–96
  2. Morton LM, Turner JJ, Cerhan JR, et al. Proposed classification of lymphoid neoplasms for epidemiologic research from the Pathology Working Group of the International Lymphoma Epidemiology Consortium (InterLymph). Blood. 2007;110:695–708
  3. Hoppe R, Mauch PM, Armitage JO, et al. Hodgkin lymphoma. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2007;
  4. Antoch G, Freudenberg LS, Debatin JF, et al. A radiologist's perspective on dual-modality PET/CT: optimized CT scanning protocols and their effect on PET quality. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:307
  5. Bar-Shalom R, Yefremov N, Guralnik L, et al. Clinical performance of PET/CT in evaluation of cancer: additional value for diagnostic imaging and patient management. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1200–1209
  6. Coleman RE, Delbeke D, Guiberteau MJ, et al. Concurrent PET/CT with an integrated imaging system: intersociety dialogue from the joint working group of the American College of Radiology, the Society of Nuclear Medicine, and the Society of Computed Body Tomography and Magnetic Resonance. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1225–1239
  7. Ell PJ. The contribution of PET/CT to improved patient management. Br J Radiol. 2006;79:32–36
  8. Farma JM, Santillan AA, Melis M, et al. PET/CT fusion scan enhances CT staging in patients with pancreatic neoplasms. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:2465–2471
  9. Sironi S, Messa C, Mangili G, et al. Integrated FDG PET/CT in patients with persistent ovarian cancer: correlation with histologic findings. Radiology. 2004;233:433–440
  10. Schiepers C, Filmont JE, Czernin J. PET for staging of Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30(Suppl 1):S82–S88
  11. Hutchings M, Barrington SF. PET/CT for therapy response assessment in lymphoma. J Nucl Med. 2009;50(Suppl 1):21S–30S
  12. Weber WA. Assessing tumor response to therapy. J Nucl Med. 2009;50(Suppl 1):1S–10S
  13. Kostakoglu L, Goldsmith SJ. F-18-FDG PET evaluation of the response to therapy for lymphoma and for breast, lung, and colorectal carcinoma. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:224–239
  14. Kuo PH, Carlson KR, Christensen I, et al. FDG-PET/CT for the evaluation of response to therapy of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma to vorinostat (suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid, SAHA) in a phase II trial. Mol Imaging Biol. 2008;10:306–314
  15. De Barsy C, Depas G, Dresse MF, et al. Whole-body FDG PET imaging as a method for staging and early assessment of treatment response in pediatric patients with lymphoma. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:346
  16. Eich HT, Kobe C, Dietlein M, et al. FDG-PET for treatment response assessment in advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma—report on the 2nd interim analysis of GHSG trial HD15. Strahlenther Und Onkol. 2008;184:11
  17. Moulin-Romsee G, Spaepen K, Stroobants S, et al. Cost-effectiveness of early treatment response assessment by PET in non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Molec Imaging. 2007;34:S242
  18. Pregno P, Chiappella A, Bello M, et al. Response assessment in aggressive non Hodgkin lymphoma disease: predictive value of mid-treatment evaluation by 18-FDG-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET). Ann Oncol. 2008;19:249–250
  19. Pregno P, Chiappella A, Penna D, et al. Predictive value of response assessment with mid-treatment evaluation of 18-FDG-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET) in aggressive non Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Haematologica Hematol J. 2007;92:59–60
  20. Stroobants S, Brepoels L, Thomas J, et al. PET-CT for treatment response assessment in lymphoma. Haematologica Hematol J. 2007;92:20
  21. Fueger BJ, Yeom K, Czernin J, et al. Comparison of CT, PET, and PET/CT for staging of patients with indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Mol Imaging Biol. 2009;11:269–274
  22. Hernandez-Maraver D, Hernandez-Navarro F, Gomez-Leon N, et al. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography: diagnostic accuracy in lymphoma. Br J Haematol. 2006;135:293–302
  23. Macapinlac HA. The utility of 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose-positron emission tomography and combined positron emission tomography and computed tomography in lymphoma and melanoma. Mol Imaging Biol. 2004;6:200–207
  24. Ngeow JY, Quek RH, Ng DC, et al. High SUV uptake on FDG-PET/CT predicts for an aggressive B-cell lymphoma in a prospective study of primary FDG-PET/CT staging in lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2009;20:1543–1547
  25. Yan JY, Zhao BS, Curran S, et al. Automated matching and segmentation of lymphoma on serial CT examinations. Med Phys. 2007;34:55–62
  26. Pekar V, Kaus MR, McNutt T. 3D image segmentation. In: Office USPaT ed. 3D image segmentation. Amsterdam, Netherlands City: Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V.; 2009;
  27. Sofka M, Stewart CV. Location registration and recognition (LRR) for longitudinal evaluation of corresponding regions in CT volumes. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv Int Conf Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv. 2008;11:989–997
  28. Duncan J, Ayache N. Medical image analysis: progress over two decades and the challenges ahead. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 2000;22:85–106
  29. Rueckert D, Sonoda LI, Hayes C, et al. Nonrigid registration using free-form deformations: application to breast MR images. IEEE Transactions Med Imaging. 1999;18:712–721
  30. Marsland S, Twining CJ, Taylor C. A minimum description length objective function for group-wise non-rigid image registration. Image Vision Comput. 2008;26:333–346
  31. Xue Z, Wong K, Wong STC. Joint registration and segmentation of serial lung CT images for image-guided lung cancer diagnosis and therapy. Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics;34:55–60.
  32. Bollard CM, Gottschalk S, Leen AM, et al. Complete responses of relapsed lymphoma following genetic modification of tumor-antigen presenting cells and T-lymphocyte transfer. Blood. 2007;110:2838–2845
  33. Jenkinson M, Smith S. A global optimisation method for robust affine registration of brain images. Med Image Anal. 2001;5:143–156
  34. Press WH, Flannery BP, Teukolsky SA, et al. Numerical recipes in C. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1992;
  35. Paragios N, Mellina-Gottardo O, Ramesh V. Gradient vector flow fast geometric active contours. IEEE Trans Patt Anal Machine Intell. 2004;26:402–407
  36. Rueckert D, Frangi AF, Schnabel JA. Automatic construction of 3-D statistical deformation models of the brain using nonrigid registration. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2003;22:1014–1025
  37. Ceresoli G, Zucali P, Van Hemert R, et al. Positron emission tomography with F18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG-PET) in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM): Prediction of response to chemotherapy by quantitative assessment of standard uptake value (SUV). Lung Cancer. 2005;49:S219
  38. Keyes JW. Suv—standard uptake or silly useless value. J Nucl Med. 1995;36:1836–1839
  39. Luo J. Estimate standard uptake value (SUV) in F18FDG PET tumor imaging. Med Phys. 2006;33:2014–2015
  40. Mahan S, Ramsey C. Automatic generation of standard uptake value (SUV) isolines for treatment planning. Med Phys. 2003;30:1429
  41. Panizo CM, Panizo E, Bosch J, et al. The maximum standard uptake value (SUVmax) of PET/CT correlates with lymphoma aggressivity. Ann Oncol. 2008;19:250
  42. Suzuki O, Morimoto M, Hashiguchi H, et al. Standardization of PET standard uptake value for delineating GTV in integrated PET-CT of head and neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;72:S409
  43. Thie JA. Understanding the standardized uptake value, its methods, and implications for usage. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:1431–1434
  44. Rosenberg SA. National Cancer Institute sponsored study of classifications of non-Hodgkins lymphomas - summary and description of a working formulation for clinical usage. Cancer. 1982;49:2112–2135
  45. Vercauteren T, Pennec X, Perchant A, et al. Non-parametric diffeomorphic image registration with the demons algorithm. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv Int Conf Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv. 2007;10:319–326
  46. Xue Z, Shen D, Davatzikos C. Statistical representation of high-dimensional deformation fields with application to statistically constrained 3D warping. Med Image Anal. 2006;10:740–751
  47. Jenkinson M. FLIRT. Book FLIRT. v5.5 ed. Oxford, UK: University of Oxford. Available online: http://www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/flirt/index.html. Accessed November 20, 2009.

PII: S1076-6332(09)00628-X

doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2009.10.026

Academic Radiology
Volume 17, Issue 4 , Pages 479-488 , April 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution