Selected PET radiomic features remain the same
Metrics: PDF 66 views | HTML 81 views | ?
Tetsuya Tsujikawa1, Hideaki Tsuyoshi2, Masafumi Kanno3, Shizuka Yamada2, Masato Kobayashi4, Norihiko Narita3, Hirohiko Kimura5, Shigeharu Fujieda3, Yoshio Yoshida2 and Hidehiko Okazawa1
1Biomedical Imaging Research Center, University of Fukui, Fukui, Japan
2Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Fukui, Fukui, Japan
3Department of Otolaryngology, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Fukui, Fukui, Japan
4Wellness Promotion Science Center, College of Medical, Pharmaceutical and Health Sciences, Kanazawa University, Kanazawa, Japan
5Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Fukui, Fukui, Japan
Tetsuya Tsujikawa, email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Keywords: PET radiomic features; PET/CT; PET/MR
Received: November 27, 2017 Accepted: March 24, 2018 Published: April 17, 2018
Purpose: We investigated whether PET radiomic features are affected by differences in the scanner, scan protocol, and lesion location using 18F-FDG PET/CT and PET/MR scans.
Results: SUV, TMR, skewness, kurtosis, entropy, and homogeneity strongly correlated between PET/CT and PET/MR images. SUVs were significantly higher on PET/MR0-2 min and PET/MR0-10 min than on PET/CT in gynecological cancer (p = 0.008 and 0.008, respectively), whereas no significant difference was observed between PET/CT, PET/MR0–2 min, and PET/MR0–10 min images in oral cavity/oropharyngeal cancer. TMRs on PET/CT, PET/MR0–2 min, and PET/MR0–10 min increased in this order in gynecological cancer and oral cavity/oropharyngeal cancer. In contrast to conventional and histogram indices, 4 textural features (entropy, homogeneity, SRE, and LRE) were not significantly different between PET/CT, PET/MR0–2 min, and PET/MR0–10 min images.
Conclusions: 18F-FDG PET radiomic features strongly correlated between PET/CT and PET/MR images. Dixon-based attenuation correction on PET/MR images underestimated tumor tracer uptake more significantly in oral cavity/oropharyngeal cancer than in gynecological cancer. 18F-FDG PET textural features were affected less by differences in the scanner and scan protocol than conventional and histogram features, possibly due to the resampling process using a medium bin width.
Methods: Eight patients with gynecological cancer and 7 with oral cavity/oropharyngeal cancer underwent a whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT scan and regional PET/MR scan in one day. PET/MR scans were performed for 10 minutes in the list mode, and PET/CT and 0–2 min and 0–10 min PET/MR images were reconstructed. The standardized uptake value (SUV), tumor-to-muscle SUV ratio (TMR), skewness, kurtosis, entropy, homogeneity, short-run emphasis (SRE), and long-run emphasis (LRE) were compared between PET/CT, PET/MR0-2 min, and PET/MR0-10 min images.
All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.