Comparison of Image Quality and Quantification Parameters between Q.Clear and OSEM Reconstruction Methods on FDG-PET/CT Images in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer

Naghavi-Behzad, Mohammad; Vogsen, Marianne; Gerke, Oke; Dahlsgaard-Wallenius, Sara Elisabeth; Nissen, Henriette Juel; Jakobsen, Nick Møldrup; Braad, Poul-Erik; Vilstrup, Mie Holm; Deak, Paul; Andersen, Troels

doi:10.3390/jimaging9030065

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Clear reconstruction methods were employed. While both methods have demonstrated nearly identical clinical accuracy [26], it could have been better to use the Q.Clear reconstruction algorithm in the evaluation of all scans with the potential for smaller lesion detection [27]. Finally, the research objectives differ from the lesion-based objectives listed on ClinicalTrials.gov due to the lack of a proper reference standard for all lesions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Pattern of Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Prospective Head-to-Head Comparison of [18F]FDG-PET/CT and CE-CT

Gram-Nielsen,

Christensen,

Naghavi-Behzad

et al. 2023

J. Imaging

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study aimed to compare the metastatic pattern of breast cancer and the intermodality proportion of agreement between [18F]FDG-PET/CT and CE-CT. Women with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) were enrolled prospectively and underwent a combined [18F]FDG-PET/CT and CE-CT scan to diagnose MBC. Experienced nuclear medicine and radiology physicians evaluated the scans blinded to the opposite scan results. Descriptive statistics were applied, and the intermodality proportion of agreement was used to compare [18F]FDG-PET/CT and CE-CT. In total, 76 women with verified MBC were enrolled in the study. The reported number of site-specific metastases for [18F]FDG-PET/CT vs. CE-CT was 53 (69.7%) vs. 44 (57.9%) for bone lesions, 31 (40.8%) vs. 43 (56.6%) for lung lesions, and 16 (21.1%) vs. 23 (30.3%) for liver lesions, respectively. The proportion of agreement between imaging modalities was 76.3% (95% CI 65.2–85.3) for bone lesions; 82.9% (95% CI 72.5–90.6) for liver lesions; 57.9% (95% CI 46.0–69.1) for lung lesions; and 59.2% (95% CI 47.3–70.4) for lymph nodes. In conclusion, bone and distant lymph node metastases were reported more often by [18F]FDG-PET/CT than CE-CT, while liver and lung metastases were reported more often by CE-CT than [18F]FDG-PET/CT. Agreement between scans was highest for bone and liver lesions and lowest for lymph node metastases.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Pattern of Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Prospective Head-to-Head Comparison of [18F]FDG-PET/CT and CE-CT

Gram-Nielsen,

Christensen,

Naghavi-Behzad

et al. 2023

J. Imaging

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

PET Images Enhancement Using Deep Training of Reconstructed Images with Bayesian Penalized Likelihood Algorithm

Ghafari,

Mofrad,

Kasraie

et al. 2024

J. Med. Biol. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

β1600 Q.Clear Digital Reconstruction of [68Ga]Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT Improves Image Quality in NET Patients

Di Franco,

Fortunati,

Zanoni

et al. 2024

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Image reconstruction is crucial for improving overall image quality and diagnostic accuracy. Q.Clear is a novel reconstruction algorithm that reduces image noise. The aim of the present study is to assess the preferred Q.Clear β-level for digital [68Ga]Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT reconstruction vs. standard reconstruction (STD) for both overall scan and single-lesion visualization. Methods: Inclusion criteria: (1) patients with/suspected neuroendocrine tumors included in a prospective observational monocentric study between September 2019 and January 2022; (2) [68Ga]Ga-DOTANOC digital PET/CT and contrast-enhanced-CT (ceCT) performed at our center at the same time. Images were reconstructed with STD and with Q.Clear β-levels 800, 1000, and 1600. Scans were blindly reviewed by three nuclear-medicine experts: the preferred β-level reconstruction was independently chosen for the visual quality of both the overall scan and the most avid target lesion < 1 cm (t) and >1 cm (T). PET/CT results were compared to ceCT. Semiquantitative analysis was performed (STD vs. β1600) in T and t concordant at both PET/CT and ceCT. Subgroup analysis was also performed in patients presenting discordant t. Results: Overall, 52 patients were included. β1600 reconstruction was considered superior over the others for both overall scan quality and single-lesion detection in all cases. The only significantly different (p < 0.001) parameters between β1600 and STD were signal-to-noise liver ratio and standard deviation of the liver background. Lesion-dependent parameters were not significantly different in concordant T (n = 37) and t (n = 10). Among 26 discordant t, when PET was positive, all findings were confirmed as malignant. Conclusions: β1600 Q.Clear reconstruction for [68Ga]Ga-DOTANOC imaging is feasible and improves image quality for both overall and small-lesion assessment.

show abstract

Comparison of Image Quality and Quantification Parameters between Q.Clear and OSEM Reconstruction Methods on FDG-PET/CT Images in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer

Cited by 3 publications

References 38 publications

The Pattern of Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Prospective Head-to-Head Comparison of [18F]FDG-PET/CT and CE-CT

The Pattern of Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Prospective Head-to-Head Comparison of [18F]FDG-PET/CT and CE-CT

PET Images Enhancement Using Deep Training of Reconstructed Images with Bayesian Penalized Likelihood Algorithm

β1600 Q.Clear Digital Reconstruction of [68Ga]Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT Improves Image Quality in NET Patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About