The impact of a Bayesian penalized-likelihood reconstruction algorithm on delayed-time-point Ga-68-PSMA PET for improved recurrent prostate cancer detection

Vieira, T.; Faria, Diogo; Silva, Fernando Azevedo; Barroso, S. L. C.; Fonseca, Graça; Oliveira, José Pereira de

doi:10.1007/s00259-018-4023-2

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…BPL reconstruction (also known as Q.Clear in GE Healthcare Imaging) is a relatively newer reconstruction method with the capacity to improve contrast over OSEM, by applying a noise penalty to individual voxels during reconstruction [ 8 – 10 ]. From a clinical point-of-view, BPL reconstruction improves the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and have been reported to be useful for better localization of the tumour as reported in case reports [ 12 , 15 ]. However, wider adoption of the method showed it cannot increase the sensitivity and specificity of PSMA PET/CT reporting [ 13 ], unable to overcome the day-to-day repeatability of the PSMA PET/CT-derived parameters [ 8 ] and may even exceeds the EARL-accredited maximum values in phantom studies which may impact development of the PSMA-based response criteria [ 16 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of quantitative whole body PET parameters on [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT using ordered Subset Expectation Maximization (OSEM) vs. bayesian penalized likelihood (BPL) reconstruction algorithms in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

Ayati,

McIntosh,

Buteau

et al. 2024

Cancer Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background PSMA PET/CT is a predictive and prognostic biomarker for determining response to [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 in patients with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Thresholds defined to date may not be generalizable to newer image reconstruction algorithms. Bayesian penalized likelihood (BPL) reconstruction algorithm is a novel reconstruction algorithm that may improve contrast whilst preventing introduction of image noise. The aim of this study is to compare the quantitative parameters obtained using BPL and the Ordered Subset Expectation Maximization (OSEM) reconstruction algorithms. Methods Fifty consecutive patients with mCRPC who underwent [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT using OSEM reconstruction to assess suitability for [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 therapy were selected. BPL algorithm was then used retrospectively to reconstruct the same PET raw data. Quantitative and volumetric measurements such as tumour standardised uptake value (SUV)max, SUVmean and Molecular Tumour Volume (MTV-PSMA) were calculated on both reconstruction methods. Results were compared (Bland-Altman, Pearson correlation coefficient) including subgroups with low and high-volume disease burdens (MTV-PSMA cut-off 40 mL). Results The SUVmax and SUVmean were higher, and MTV-PSMA was lower in the BPL reconstructed images compared to the OSEM group, with a mean difference of 8.4 (17.5%), 0.7 (8.2%) and − 21.5 mL (-3.4%), respectively. There was a strong correlation between the calculated SUVmax, SUVmean, and MTV-PSMA values in the OSEM and BPL reconstructed images (Pearson r values of 0.98, 0.99, and 1.0, respectively). No patients were reclassified from low to high volume disease or vice versa when switching from OSEM to BPL reconstruction. Conclusions [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT quantitative and volumetric parameters produced by BPL and OSEM reconstruction methods are strongly correlated. Differences are proportional and small for SUVmean, which is used as a predictive biomarker. Our study suggests that both reconstruction methods are acceptable without clinical impact on quantitative or volumetric findings. For longitudinal comparison, committing to the same reconstruction method would be preferred to ensure consistency.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of quantitative whole body PET parameters on [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT using ordered Subset Expectation Maximization (OSEM) vs. bayesian penalized likelihood (BPL) reconstruction algorithms in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

Ayati,

McIntosh,

Buteau

et al. 2024

Cancer Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Using BPL reconstruction in clinical studies enables improved lesion detection, and this has been shown in a wide variety of studies, for example, for 18 F-FDG in lung nodules [17,19], mediastinal nodes [20] and liver metastases [21]. PET imaging with other tracers also benefits from BPL reconstruction [17], for example, 68 Ga-PSMA [22,23], 68 Ga-DOTATOC [24], 68 Ga-RM2 [25], 90 Y-SIRT [26,27], 18 F-PSMA [28], 18 F-NaF [29], 68 Ga-citrate [30], 18 F-FACBC [31], 13 N-NH3 [32], 11 C-acetate [24] and 89 Zr-immuno-PET [33]. In addition, and perhaps most importantly, BPL is particularly advantageous in patients with high BMI [34,35], because they usually have the greatest background image noise where both the detection and quantification of small abnormalities are most problematic.…”

Section: The Use Of Bayesian Penalized Likelihood (Bpl) Reconstructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

New PET technologies – embracing progress and pushing the limits

Aide

Lasnon

Kesner

et al. 2021

Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…[8] Clinically, BPL reconstruction reduces noise, especially in larger patients and within smaller lesions. [9][10][11][12][13][14][15] The maximum standard uptake value (SUVmax) body weight (BW, SUVmax) is a semi-quantitative metric for intensity of radiotracer activity within a region of interest accounting for amount of injected dose and BW while correcting for radioactive time decay [SUVmax 6 Medicine lesions) and this difference tends to be more pronounced in tumors relative to normal liver. [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] Alterations in relative SUVmax values, and the relationship between lesion SUV compared to liver, raise concern around accuracy and consistency from interpreting physicians, including when imaging lymphoma.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[8] Clinically, BPL reconstruction reduces noise, especially in larger patients and within smaller lesions. [9–15]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bayesian penalized likelihood PET reconstruction impact on quantitative metrics in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluate the quantitative, subjective (Deauville score [DS]) and reader agreement differences between standard ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) and Bayesian penalized likelihood (BPL) positron emission tomography (PET) reconstruction methods. A retrospective review of 104 F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET/computed tomography (CT) exams among 52 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. An unblinded radiologist moderator reviewed both BPL and OSEM PET/CT exams. Four blinded radiologists then reviewed the annotated cases to provide a visual DS for each annotated lesion. Significant ( P < .001) differences in BPL and OSEM PET methods were identified with greater standard uptake value (SUV) maximum and SUV mean for BPL. The DS was altered in 25% of cases when BPL and OSEM were reviewed by the same radiologist. Interobserver DS agreement was higher for OSEM (>1 cm lesion = 0.89 and ≤1 cm lesion = 0.84) compared to BPL (>1 cm lesion = 0.85 and ≤1 cm lesion = 0.81). Among the 4 readers, average intraobserver visual DS agreement between OSEM and BPL was 0.67 for lesions >1cm and 0.4 for lesions ≤1 cm. F-18 Fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma reconstructed with BPL has higher SUV values, altered DSs and reader agreement when compared to OSEM. This report finds volumetric PET measurements such as metabolic tumor volume to be similar between BPL and OSEM PET reconstructions. Efforts such as adoption of European Association Research Ltd accreditation should be made to harmonize PET data with an aim at balancing the need for harmonization and sensitivity for lesion detection.

show abstract

The impact of a Bayesian penalized-likelihood reconstruction algorithm on delayed-time-point Ga-68-PSMA PET for improved recurrent prostate cancer detection

Cited by 6 publications

References 5 publications

Comparison of quantitative whole body PET parameters on [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT using ordered Subset Expectation Maximization (OSEM) vs. bayesian penalized likelihood (BPL) reconstruction algorithms in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

Comparison of quantitative whole body PET parameters on [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT using ordered Subset Expectation Maximization (OSEM) vs. bayesian penalized likelihood (BPL) reconstruction algorithms in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

New PET technologies – embracing progress and pushing the limits

Bayesian penalized likelihood PET reconstruction impact on quantitative metrics in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About