## 3 Results
The threshold of FBB SUVr was SUVr(FC) = 1.009 for the lowest region when calculated using FreeSurfer, SUVr(PUT) = 1.471 for the highest region; SUVr(PQ) = 1.173 for the smallest region when calculated using PMOD SUVr(PUT) = 1.466 for the largest region, as presented in Table 3. The threshold of FMM SUVr was SUVr(LTC) = 1.264 for the smallest region when calculated using FreeSurfer, SUVr(THA) = 1.725 for the largest region; SUVr(MTC) = 1.093 for the smallest region when calculated using PMOD and SUVr(GCP) = 1.598 for the largest region, as presented in Table 4. The threshold of FMM SUVr was SUVr(FC) = 1.208 when calculated using FreeSurfer, the largest region was SUVr(PUT) = 1.838, and when calculated using PMOD, the smallest region was SUVr(PC) = 1.218, and the largest region was SUVr(MCT) = 1.564, as presented in Table 5.  
The SUVr of the FBB, FMM, and FPN brain PET were extracted from the composite region using FreeSurfer, and a box plot comparing the normal and patient groups by age and sex is shown in Figure 6. There was no significant difference in the classification ability according to age and sex distribution. It was observed that there was little difference in \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**FPN-FS *} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**FPN-PMOD**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**R**} \\ \cline{2-2} \cline{5-10}  & **Sensitivity** & **Specificity** & **Threshold** & \(p\)**-Value** & **Sensitivity** & **Specificity** & **Threshold** & \(p\)**-Value** \\ \hline FC & 83.33 & 86.96 & 1.208 & 2.27 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-9}\) & 80.95 & 100.00 & 1.231 & 5.49 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-12}\) & 0.91 \\ LTC & 80.95 & 100.00 & 1.310 & 8.55 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-12}\) & 85.71 & 95.65 & 1.278 & 4.10 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-12}\) & 0.93 \\ MTC & 71.43 & 82.61 & 1.705 & 5.13 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-6}\) & 69.05 & 82.61 & 1.564 & 6.34 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-5}\) & 0.93 \\ PC & 80.95 & 95.65 & 1.286 & 1.08 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-11}\) & 78.57 & 95.65 & 1.218 & 3.64 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-12}\) & 0.94 \\ OC & 73.81 & 100.00 & 1.237 & 2.22 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-10}\) & 90.48 & 86.96 & 1.219 & 2.49 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-9}\) & 0.93 \\ GCA & 64.29 & 100.00 & 1.517 & 3.35 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-8}\) & 71.43 & 100.00 & 1.492 & 2.04 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-9}\) & 0.96 \\ GCP & 83.33 & 86.96 & 1.411 & 1.97 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-10}\) & 73.81 & 100.00 & 1.520 & 3.12 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-10}\) & 0.91 \\ CN & 95.24 & 26.09 & 1.276 & 2.08 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-1}\) & 88.1 & 86.96 & 1.245 & 1.33 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-8}\) & 0.26 \\ PUT & 76.19 & 73.91 & 1.838 & 1.85 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-2}\) & 90.48 & 87.50 & 1.354 & 5.71 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-12}\) & 0.41 \\ THA & 88.10 & 26.09 & 1.558 & 4.30 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-1}\) & 76.19 & 95.65 & 1.164 & 2.44 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-10}\) & 0.25 \\ PQ & 73.81 & 100.00 & 1.371 & 1.60 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-11}\) & 90.48 & 86.96 & 1.229 & 1.37 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-12}\) & 0.96 \\ Composite & 88.10 & 86.96 & 1.237 & 9.41 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-12}\) & 83.33 & 95.65 & 1.234 & 6.70 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-13}\) & 0.95 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
* FS: FreeSurfer.  
\end{table} 
Table 5: Sensitivity, specificity, threshold of SUVr, \(p\)-value in t-test, and correlation coefficient (R) calculated using PMOD and FreeSurfer algorithms in the FPN brain PET SUVr. Each value was calculated for FC, LTC, MTC, PC, OC, GCA, GCP, PQ, and composite regions. the discrimination ability between PMOD and FreeSurfer, each with different algorithms. The distribution of the brain PET SUVr of FBB and FMM was not significantly different from the results obtained by PMOD and FreeSurfer. For the three radiopharmaceuticals, it was observed that the mean value and distribution of the extracted SUVr data were not significantly different in the normal group. In the FreeSurfer algorithm, similar to the PMOD algorithm, SUVr in the normal group of FBB brain PET was distributed with the narrowest value; therefore, it was observed that the classification with the patient group was the best.