FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0

The aim of this guideline is to provide a minimum standard for the acquisition and interpretation of PET and PET/CT scans with [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG). This guideline will therefore address general information about [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT) and is provided to help the physician and physicist to assist to carrying out, interpret, and document quantitative FDG PET/CT examinations, but will concentrate on the optimisation of diagnostic quality and quantitative information

18FDG positron emission tomography versus 67Ga scintigraphy as prognostic test during chemotherapy for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma

A prospective study was performed, comparing gallium scintigraphy ( 67Ga) and positron emission tomography (PET) using fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (18FDG), to monitor the response of aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma during treatment. 67Ga and 18FDG scans were performed in 26 patients after two cycles of CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone) therapy. The scans were reviewed independently by four experienced nuclear physicians, who were blinded for the alternative scan technique and follow-up. Eleven out of 26 patients remained free from progression with a mean follow up of 25 ± 5 months, whereas 14 patients relapsed, and one died of lung cancer. Interobserver variation was significantly greater for 67Ga than for 18FDG PET. Some 64% of patients who had a negative early restaging 18FDG PET remained free from progression versus 50% of patients with negative 67Ga scans. Only 25% of patients with a positive PET remained disease free versus 42% of 67Ga-positive patients. Time to progression was associated with 18FDG PET results, but not with those by 67Ga. 18FDG PET had better test characteristics than 67Ga for the evaluation of early response in aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients

FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging—version 1.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging

General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible

The Netherlands protocol for standardisation and quantification of FDG whole body PET studies in multi-centre trials.

Contains fulltext : 70810.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)INTRODUCTION: Several studies have shown the usefulness of positron emission tomography (PET) quantification using standardised uptake values (SUV) for diagnosis and staging, prognosis and response monitoring. Many factors affect SUV, such as patient preparation procedures, scan acquisition, image reconstruction and data analysis settings, and the variability in methodology across centres prohibits exchange of SUV data. Therefore, standardisation of 2-[(18)F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) PET whole body procedures is required in multi-centre trials. METHODS: A protocol for standardisation of quantitative FDG whole body PET studies in the Netherlands (NL) was defined. This protocol is based on standardisation of: (1) patient preparation; (2) matching of scan statistics by prescribing dosage as function of patient weight, scan time per bed position, percentage of bed overlap and image acquisition mode (2D or 3D); (3) matching of image resolution by prescribing reconstruction settings for each type of scanner; (4) matching of data analysis procedure by defining volume of interest methods and SUV calculations and; (5) finally, a multi-centre QC procedure is defined using a 20-cm diameter phantom for verification of scanner calibration and the NEMA NU 2 2001 Image Quality phantom for verification of activity concentration recoveries (i.e., verification of image resolution and reconstruction convergence). DISCUSSION: This paper describes a protocol for standardization of quantitative FDG whole body multi-centre PET studies. CONCLUSION: The protocol was successfully implemented in the Netherlands and has been approved by the Netherlands Society of Nuclear Medicine