↓ Skip to main content

RESOLUTE PET/MRI Attenuation Correction for O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (FET) in Brain Tumor Patients with Metal Implants

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
RESOLUTE PET/MRI Attenuation Correction for O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (FET) in Brain Tumor Patients with Metal Implants
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, August 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2017.00453
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claes N. Ladefoged, Flemming L. Andersen, Andreas Kjær, Liselotte Højgaard, Ian Law

Abstract

Aim: Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging is a useful tool for assisting in correct differentiation of tumor progression from reactive changes, and the radiolabeled amino acid analog tracer O-(2-(18)F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (FET)-PET is amongst the most frequently used. The FET-PET images need to be quantitatively correct in order to be used clinically, which require accurate attenuation correction (AC) in PET/MRI. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of the subject-specific MR-derived AC method RESOLUTE in post-operative brain tumor patients. Methods: We analyzed 51 post-operative brain tumor patients (68 examinations, 200 MBq [18F]-FET) investigated in a PET/MRI scanner. MR-AC maps were acquired using: (1) the Dixon water fat separation sequence, (2) the ultra short echo time (UTE) sequences, (3) calculated using our new RESOLUTE methodology, and (4) a same day low-dose CT used as reference "gold standard." For each subject and each AC method the tumor was delineated by isocontouring tracer uptake above a tumor(T)-to-brain background (B) activity ratio of 1.6. We measured B, tumor mean and maximal activity (TMEAN, TMAX), biological tumor volume (BTV), and calculated the clinical metrics TMEAN/B and TMAX/B. Results: When using RESOLUTE 5/68 studies did not meet our predefined acceptance criteria of TMAX/B difference to CT-AC < ±0.1 or 5%, TMEAN/B < ±0.05 or 5%, and BTV < ±2 mL or 10%. In total, 46/68 studies failed our acceptance criteria using Dixon, and 26/68 using UTE. The 95% limits of agreement for TMAX/B was for RESOLUTE (-3%; 4%), Dixon (-9%; 16%), and UTE (-7%; 10%). The absolute error when measuring BTV was 0.7 ± 1.9 mL (N.S) with RESOLUTE, 5.3 ± 10 mL using Dixon, and 1.7 ± 3.7 mL using UTE. RESOLUTE performed best in the identification of the location of peak activity and in brain tumor follow-up monitoring using clinical FET PET metrics. Conclusions: Overall, we found RESOLUTE to be the AC method that most robustly reproduced the CT-AC clinical metrics per se, during follow-up, and when interpreted into defined clinical use cut-off criteria and into the patient history. RESOLUTE is especially suitable for brain tumor patients, as these often present with distorted anatomy where other methods based on atlas/template information might fail.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 24%
Student > Master 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Other 2 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 7 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 36%
Physics and Astronomy 4 16%
Neuroscience 2 8%
Computer Science 1 4%
Engineering 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 August 2017.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#8,671
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,651
of 328,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#131
of 165 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,185 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 165 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.