Abstract P4-02-05: Test-retest fidelity of FDG SUVmax in bone and non-boney metastatic breast cancer lesions in local area network PET/CT scanners
Authors: HM Linden, LM Peterson, B Kurland, T Roberts, J Specht, AT Shields, A Novakova, R Christopfel, D Byrd, M Muzi, DA Mankoff, P Kinahan
Journal: Cancer Research (2017)

Abstract Background: Metabolic activity in lesions, measured by FDG-PET, is often used for assessing tumor aggressiveness and response to therapy. Patients may be scanned on different machines, so quantitative measurements should be reproducible. Reducing SUV variability in PET machines throughout a local network can aid in monitoring patient response to therapy and increase access to clinical trials. Methods: Eighteen female patients with advanced or metastatic breast cancer underwent paired FDG PET/CT test-retest studies with 1-15 days between scans, and without interim change in treatment. Ten patients were studied in the same scanner and 8 patients were studied in 2 different scanners. Five different PET/CT scanners were used (2 GE DSTE, 2 Siemens (BioGraph 6 and mCT), 1 Philips Ingenuity TF). Each PET/CT scanner was calibrated using NIST-traceable reference sources to characterize and reduce variability. All of the images were interpreted by two separate reviewers. SUVmax values in lesions, corresponding normal tissue, and normal liver were collected. Linear mixed models with random intercept (patient effects) were fitted to compare differences in log(|SUVmax % difference|+.01) in multiple lesions per patient. Results: SUVmax was assessed in a total of 130 lesions (75 bone). The median number of lesions per patient was 5 (range 1-17). Average SUVmax ranged from 1.0 to 18.2 (mean±SD = 6.0±3.2). The median SUVmax difference was 0.4 (8%) for 47 lesions imaged twice in the same scanner, and was 0.6 (13%) for 83 lesions imaged in two different scanners. In a multivariable linear mixed effects model, SUVmax for different scanners within the same institution did not differ more than for the same scanner (p=0.39), but repeat scans with different scanners and site personnel at had an average of 78% greater percentage difference in SUVmax than for the same scanner (p=0.009). In the same model, the average percent difference in SUVmax for bone lesions was estimated as 30% lower than for other sites (p=0.06, 95% confidence interval 0-50%). Examining normal liver uptake, the median SUVmean was 2.5 (range 1.9-3.1) with an median 6.5% difference between measurements (range 1.1%-23.7%) that did not appear to differ based on scanners used for repeat measurements (p=0.47). Conclusions: The variability in quantitative FDG SUVmax between scans is modest, suggesting reliable reproducibility in appropriately calibrated settings. In our study, bone lesions had somewhat higher fidelity than other tumor sites. Additional studies will address variability in other cancer types. Careful calibration and monitoring of PET/CT scanners, and consistent imaging protocols are necessary in clinical trials that utilize quantitative PET/CT imaging in order to confidently interpret results. Research Support: NIH grant U01-CA148131 and NCI-SAIC Contract 24XS036-004. Citation Format: Linden HM, Peterson LM, Kurland B, Roberts T, Specht J, Shields AT, Novakova A, Christopfel R, Byrd D, Muzi M, Mankoff DA, Kinahan P. Test-retest fidelity of FDG SUVmax in bone and non-boney metastatic breast cancer lesions in local area network PET/CT scanners [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-02-05.