Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Usefulness of standardized uptake value normalized by individual CT-based lean body mass in application of PET response criteria in solid tumors (PERCIST)

Radiological Physics and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Our aim in this study was to verify the usefulness of the standardized uptake value (SUV) normalized by individual CT-based lean body mass (LBMCT) in application of PET response criteria in solid tumors (PERCIST).We retrospectively investigated 14 patients (4 male and 10 female) with malignant lymphoma who were undergoing chemotherapy. 18F-FDG PET/CT examinations were performed before and after chemotherapy. The LBMCT was calculated by estimation of fat weight from CT data (from skull base to pelvis). The mean ± standard deviation (SD) and the Bland–Altman plot were used for comparison among body weight, LBMCT, and LBM derived from a predictive equation (LBMPE). Indices for FDG uptake in the liver were: SUV, SUV based on LBMPE (SULPE), and SUV based on LBMCT (SULCT). Overall differences between the uptake values were analyzed by one-way ANOVA. If the ANOVA showed significance, differences between uptake values were investigated further by use of the Tukey–Kramer test. The mean values of body weight, LBMPE, and LBMCT were: 55.4 ± 14.9 (39.0–112.0), 43.0 ± 10.5 (31.3–75.2), and 35.3 ± 9.8 (23.4–75.8) kg, respectively. There was a wide dispersion between LBMPE and LBMCT (differences, 7.6 ± 3.6 kg; 95 % CI, 6.42–8.85). LBMPE was higher than LBMCT in all the cases except in Case 11. The mean uptake values significantly differed among SUV, SULPE, and SULCT (F = 68.3, p < 0.05). Whereas SULPE deviated from PERCIST criteria in seven patients, SULCT satisfied the criteria except in one case. These results suggest that liver SULCT is useful for application of PERCIST.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge MA. From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med. 2009;50(suppl 1):122S–50S.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Zasadny KR, Wahl RL. Standardized uptake values of normal tissues at PET with 2-[fluorine-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose: variations with body weight and a method for correction. Radiology. 1993;189:847–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sugawara Y, Zasadny KR, Neuhoff AW, Wahl RL. Reevaluation of the standardized uptake value for FDG: variations with body weight and method for correction. Radiology. 1999;213:521–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Yeung HW, Sanches A, Squire OD, Macapinlac HA, Larson SM, Erdi YE. Standardized uptake value in pediatric patients: an investigation to determine the optimum measurement parameter. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002;29:61–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Menda KH, Bushnell DL, Madsen MT, McLaughlin K, Kahn D, Kernstine KH. Evaluation of various corrections to the standardized uptake value for diagnosis of pulmonary malignancy. Nucl Med Commun. 2001;22:1077–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kim CK, Gupta NC, Chandramouli B, Alavi A. Standardized uptake values of FDG: body surface area correction is preferable to body weight correction. J Nucl Med. 1994;35:164–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Tahari AK, Chien D, Azadi JR, Wahl RL. Optimum lean body formulation for correction of standardized uptake value in PET imaging. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:1481–4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Hamill JJ, Sunderland JJ, LeBlanc AK, Kojima CJ, Wall J, Martin EB. Evaluation of CT-based lean-body SUV. Med Phys. 2013;40:092504.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chan T. Computerized method for automatic evaluation of lean body mass PET/CT: comparison with predictive equations. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kim WH, Kim CG, Kim DW. Comparison of SUVs normalized by lean body mass determined by CT with those normalized by lean body mass estimated by predictive equations in normal tissues. Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;46:182–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Lindholm P, Minn H, Leskinen-Kallio S, Bergman J, Ruotsalainen U, Joensuu H. Influence of the blood glucose concentration on FDG uptake in cancer-a PET study. J Nucl Med. 1993;34:1–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Langen KJ, Braun U, Rota Kops E, Herzog H, Kuwert B, Feinendegen LE. The influence of plasma glucose levels on fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in bronchial carcinomas. J Nucl Med. 1993;34:355–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ito H, Ohshima A, Ohto N, Ogasawara M, Tsuzuki M, Takao K, et al. Relation between body composition and age in healthy Japanese subjects. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2001;55:462–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Paquet N, Albert A, Foidart J, Hustinx R. Within-patient variability of 18F-FDG: standardized uptake values in normal tissues. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:784–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Morgan DJ, Bray KM. Lean body mass as a predictor of drug dosage: implications for drug therapy. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1994;26:292–307.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Badrul C, Lars S, Magne A, Jan K, Henry K, Roger L. A multicompartment body composition technique based on computerized tomography. Int J Obes. 1994;18:219–34.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Muller MJ, Bosy-Westphal A, Kutzer D, Heller M. Metabolically active components of fat-free mass and resting energy expenditure in humans: recent lessons from imaging technologies. Obes Rev. 2002;3:113–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lodge MA, Chaudhry MA, Wahl RL. Noise considerations for PET quantification using maximum and peak standardized uptake value. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:1041–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Mizuta T, Senda M, Okamura T, Kitamura K, Inaoka Y, Takahashi M, et al. NEC density and liver ROI S/N ratio for image quality control of whole-body FDG-PET scans: comparison with visual assessment. Mol Imaging Biol. 2009;11:480–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Fukukita H, Suzuki K, Matsumoto K, Terauchi T, Daisaki H, Ikari Y, et al. Japanese guideline for the oncology FDG-PET/CT data acquisition protocol: synopsis of version 2.0. Ann Nucl Med. 2014;28:693–705.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. The Examination Committee of Criteria for ‘Obesity Disease’ in Japan, Japan Society for the Study of Obesity. New criteria for ‘obesity disease’ in Japan. Circ J. 2002;66:987–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Daisaki H, Hamada K, Yanagisawa M, Shimada N, Tateishi U. SUL using cohort-matched prediction equation derived from Japanese DEXA study. J Nucl Med. 2014;55(Suppl 1):1498.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Yoshiko Hidaka, Asuka Takigawa, and Yasuhiro Wada for their contributions to this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Atsushi Narita.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Narita, A., Shiomi, S., Katayama, Y. et al. Usefulness of standardized uptake value normalized by individual CT-based lean body mass in application of PET response criteria in solid tumors (PERCIST). Radiol Phys Technol 9, 170–177 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-016-0346-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-016-0346-5

Keywords

Navigation