Faculty Bibliography

Background: Simultaneous PET/MR is a new technology that may be used in the evaluation of dementia patients. There are few data in the literature regarding quantitative differences between PET data obtained at PET/CT vs PET/ MR and how this may impact image interpretation. This study compared the PET interpretation of PET/CT vs PET/ MR by two independent experienced nuclear medicine physicians. Methods: Forty-five minutes following injection of 10 mCi of FDG, 19 patients with clinically-suspected dementia underwent a 15-min clinical brain PET/CT. Simultaneous PET/MR scanning was subsequently performed (60 min listmode) at approximately 90 min post-injection. Two experienced nuclear medicine physicians blindly interpreted the PET portion of all PET/CT scans, attributing a specific diagnosis (normal, AD, FTD, LBD, other dementia, mixed phenotype or unspecified disease) and severity scale (mild, moderate or severe abnormality). The readers then blindly interpreted the PET data obtained from PET/MR. Concordance between PET/CT (reference standard) and PET/ MR with respect to diagnosis and disease severity was assessed for each reader. Results: Reader A classified 12 PET/CT scans as AD, 5 as unspecified dementia, 1 as LBD and 1 as normal with a mean severity score of 2.0. Reader B classified 10 PET/CT scans as AD, 3 as unspecified, 1 as LBD and 5 as normal with mean severity score of 2.1. PET/MR interpretations with comparison to PET/CT yielded an 84% (16/19) intrareader concordance of diagnosis, with 95% (18/19) of severity scores varying by one point or less. Reader B exhibited 84% intra-reader concordance of dementia pattern diagnosis, with 89% (17/19) of all scores varying by one point or less. Conclusions: Our preliminary analysis in clinically-suspected dementia patients showed a relatively high concordance of intra-reader assignment of diagnosis and severity of findings between PET/CT and PET/MR when evaluated by two blinded experienced nuclear medicine physicians. These results suggest PET/MR!

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of the spatial registration of conventional PET/CT with that of hybrid PET/MRI of patients with FDG-avid metastatic lesions. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Thirteen patients with known metastatic lesions underwent FDG PET/CT followed by PET/MRI with a hybrid whole-body system. The inclusion criterion for tumor analysis was spherical or oval FDG-avid tumor clearly identified with both CT and MRI. The spatial coordinates (x, y, z) of the visually estimated centers of the lesions were determined for PET/CT (PET and CT independently) and PET/MRI (PET, T1-weighted gradient-echo sequence with radial stack-of-stars trajectory, T2-weighted sequence), and the b0 images of an echo-planar imaging (EPI) diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) acquisition. All MRI sequences were performed in the axial plane with free breathing. The spatial coordinates of the estimated centers of the lesions were determined for PET and CT and PET and MRI sequences. Distance between the isocenter of the lesion on PET images and on the images obtained with the anatomic modalities was measured, and misregistration (in millimeters) was calculated. The degree of misregistration was compared between PET/CT and PET/MRI with a paired Student t test. RESULTS. Nineteen lesions were evaluated. On PET/CT images, the average of the total misregistration in all planes of CT compared with PET was 4.13 +/- 4.24 mm. On PET/MR images, lesion misregistration between PET and T1-weighted gradient-echo images had a shift of 2.41 +/- 1.38 mm and between PET and b0 DW images was 5.97 +/- 2.83 mm. Similar results were calculated for 11 lesions on T2-weighted images. The shift on T2-weighted images compared with PET images was 2.24 +/- 1.12 mm. Paired Student t test calculations for PET/CT compared with PET/MRI T1-weighted gradient-echo images with a radial stack-of-stars trajectory, b0 DW images, and T2-weighted images showed significant differences (p < 0.05). Similar results were seen in the analysis of six lung lesions. CONCLUSION. PET/MRI T1-weighted gradient-echo images with a radial stack-of-stars trajectory and T2-weighted images had more accurate spatial registration than PET/CT images. This may be because that the whole-body PET/MRI system used can perform simultaneous acquisition, whereas the PET/CT system acquires data sequentially. However, the EPI-based b0 DWI datasets were significantly misregistered compared with the PET/CT datasets, especially in the thorax. Radiologists reading PET/MR images should be aware of the potential for misregistration on images obtained with EPI-based DWI sequences because of inherent spatial distortion associated with this type of MRI acquisition.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to assess the correlation between standardized uptake value (SUV) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) of neoplastic lesions in the use of a simultaneous PET/MRI hybrid system. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Twenty-four patients with known primary malignancies underwent FDG PET/CT. They then underwent whole-body PET/MRI. Diffusion-weighted imaging was performed with free breathing and a single-shot spin-echo echo-planar imaging sequence with b values of 0, 350, and 750 s/mm(2). Regions of interest were manually drawn along the contours of neoplastic lesions larger than 1 cm, which were clearly identified on PET and diffusion-weighted images. Maximum SUV (SUVmax) on PET/MRI and PET/CT images, mean SUV (SUVmean), minimum ADC (ADCmin), and mean ADC (ADCmean) were recorded on PET/MR images for each FDG-avid neoplastic soft-tissue lesion with a maximum of three lesions per patient. Pearson correlation coefficient was used to asses the following relations: SUVmax versus ADCmin on PET/MR and PET/CT images, SUVmean versus ADCmean, and ratio of SUVmax to mean liver SUV (SUV ratio) versus ADCmin. A subanalysis of patients with progressive disease versus partial treatment response was performed with the ratio of SUVmax to ADCmin for the most metabolically active lesion. RESULTS. Sixty-nine neoplastic lesions (52 nonosseous lesions, 17 bone metastatic lesions) were evaluated. The mean SUVmax from PET/MRI was 7.0 +/- 6.0; SUVmean, 5.6 +/- 4.6; mean ADCmin, 1.10 +/- 0.58; and mean ADCmean, 1.48 +/- 0.72. A significant inverse Pearson correlation coefficient was found between PET/MRI SUVmax and ADCmin (r = -0.21, p = 0.04), between SUVmean and ADCmean (r = -0.18, p = 0.07), and between SUV ratio and ADCmin (r = -0.27, p = 0.01). A similar inverse Pearson correlation coefficient was found between the PET/CT SUVmax and ADCmin. Twenty of 24 patients had previously undergone PET/CT; five patients had a partial treatment response, and six had progressive disease according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1. The ratio between SUVmax and ADCmin was higher among patients with progressive disease than those with a partial treatment response. CONCLUSION. Simultaneous PET/MRI is a promising technology for the detection of neoplastic disease. There are inverse correlations between SUVmax and ADCmin and between SUV ratio and ADCmin. Correlation coefficients between SUVmax and ADCmin from PET/MRI were similar to values obtained with SUVmax from the same-day PET/CT. Given that both SUV and ADC are related to malignancy and that the correlation between the two biomarkers is relatively weak, SUV and ADC values may offer complementary information to aid in determination of prognosis and treatment response. The combined tumoral biomarker, ratio between SUVmax and ADCmin, may be useful for assessing progressive disease versus partial treatment response.

Hepatitis B reactivation can occur with cytotoxic chemotherapy in patients with hepatitis B and cancer. Reactivation can occur in a patient with chronic hepatitis, an inactive carrier, or one with resolved hepatitis. Clinical presentation may range from subclinical elevation of liver enzymes to fatal fulminant hepatic failure. Mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, which include everolimus, are a new generation of targeted agents that are currently approved for many cancers (since March 2009) including advanced hormone receptor positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer, in conjunction with exemestane (as of July 2012). We are therefore still learning the various adverse events that occur with this new class of agents. Here, we present an unfortunate case of fatal hepatitis B reactivation in a woman with metastatic breast cancer treated with everolimus and exemestane. We have detailed the controversies around hepatitis B screening prior to immunosuppressive therapy. Clinicians and patients should be aware of this rare but fatal complication prior to everolimus use, and a detailed history, screening for hepatitis B and prophylactic antiviral treatment should be considered.

Purpose:To assess diagnostic sensitivity of radial T1-weighted gradient-echo (radial volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination [VIBE]) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, positron emission tomography (PET), and combined simultaneous PET and MR imaging with an integrated PET/MR system in the detection of lung nodules, with combined PET and computed tomography (CT) as a reference.Materials and Methods:In this institutional review board-approved HIPAA-compliant prospective study, 32 patients with tumors who underwent clinically warranted fluorine 18 (18F) fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET/CT followed by PET/MR imaging were included. In all patients, the thorax station was examined with free-breathing radial VIBE MR imaging and simultaneously acquired PET data. Presence and size of nodules and FDG avidity were assessed on PET/CT, radial VIBE, PET, and PET/MR images. Percentage of nodules detected on radial VIBE and PET images was compared with that on PET/MR images by using generalized estimating equations. Maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) in pulmonary nodules with a diameter of at least 1 cm was compared between PET/CT and PET/MR imaging with Pearson rank correlation.Results:A total of 69 nodules, including 45 FDG-avid nodules, were detected with PET/CT. The sensitivity of PET/MR imaging was 70.3% for all nodules, 95.6% for FDG-avid nodules, and 88.6% for nodules 0.5 cm in diameter or larger. PET/MR imaging had higher sensitivity than PET for all nodules (70.3% vs 61.6%, P = .002) and higher sensitivity than MR imaging for FDG-avid nodules (95.6% vs 80.0%, P = .008). There was a significantly strong correlation between SUVmax of pulmonary nodules obtained with PET/CT and that obtained with PET/MR imaging (r = 0.96, P < .001).Conclusion:Radial VIBE and PET data acquired simultaneously with PET/MR imaging have high sensitivity in the detection of FDG-avid nodules and nodules 0.5 cm in diameter or larger, with low sensitivity for small non-FDG-avid nodules.(c) RSNA, 2013.

INTRODUCTION: Accurate, reproducible acquisition and interpretation of PET-CT scans can be challenging. As part of an annual quality enhancement exercise for Nuclear Medicine laboratories in the US Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA), we employed a chest imaging phantom designed to test integrated PET-CT imaging and interpretative performance. METHODS: In late 2011, a PET-CT chest phantom was imaged by 88 PET/PET-CT scanners. The phantom, developed by the SNM Quality Assurance Committee (QAC) simulated a stage IIIb lung cancer with 2 "malignant" lung nodules and 3 "metastatic" lymph nodes. Data collection included DICOM images, quality control information, scanner type, imaging parameters (PET and CT) and dose-calibrator information. Interpreting physicians (N=180) reported lesion locations, body-weight-corrected SUVmax and "staged" the simulated lung cancer. We analyzed factors associated with poor performance to assist with remediation of problems identified with image acquisition, processing and interpretation. RESULTS: Based upon QAC-established performance benchmarks 16% (n=14) laboratories failed the exercise. Suboptimal image quality was most often related to short acquisition times (n=6, 6.8%) e.g. 2D mode scanners with imaging time/bed position <3min; suboptimal reconstruction parameters (n=6, 6.8%) e.g. filtered back projection rather than iterative reconstruction; outdated scanners (n=3, 3.4%) e.g. >8y/o without integrated CT; and data entry errors (n=2, 2.3%). SUVmax values varied due to several errors e.g. improper calibration factors or calculation/s. 5% failures (n=4) were related to protocol non-adherence. 33 sites (38%) had not updated dose-calibrators to conform to new NIST standards. 4 sites (5%) used CT tube electrical currents >240 mA for "non-diagnostic" CT. Interpretative performance was negatively impacted by incorrect lesion detection/localization and/or SUV calculations/interpretation. 45 (25%) physicians did not assign Stage IIIb, indicating lack of knowledge of contemporary criteria for lung cancer staging. Other important errors included knowledge of the glucose effect on SUV (n=16, 9% incorrect) and dependence of SUVmean calculations on thresholding techniques (n=38, 21% incorrect). CONCLUSIONS: These "lessons learned" have been used to remediate poor performance and to improve and standardize PET-CT imaging and interpretation in DVA. Our >20yr experience with simulated imaging phantoms continues to demonstrate that strict adherence to standardized NM procedure guidelines is critical for optimal image quality, correct interpretation, longitudinal parametric data comparisons and meaningful participation in clinical trials