ABSTRACT
An elevated serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level alone cannot distinguish between local-regional recurrences and distant metastases after treatment with curative intent. With available salvage treatments, it has become important to localize the site of recurrence. 11C-Acetate PET/CT was performed in patients with rising PSA, with statistical analysis of detection rates, sites/location of detection, PSA kinetics and comparison with other tracers (FDG and Choline). Correlation to biopsy, subsequent imaging and PSA response to focal treatment was also performed. 88% (637) of 721 11C-Acetate PET/CT scans performed were positive. There was a statistically significant difference in PSA values between the positive and negative scans (P < 0.001 for mean difference) with the percentage of positive scans and PSA having a positive correlation. A PSA of 1.09 ng/mL was found to be an optimal cutoff. PSAdT was significantly correlated with a positive scan only when the PSA was < 1.0 ng/mL. For this subgroup, a PSAdT of < 3.8 months appeared significant (P < 0.05) as an optimal cutoff point. 11C-Acetate PET/CT demonstrates a high detection rate for the site of recurrence/metastasis in biochemical relapsed prostate cancer (88% overall detection rate, PPV 90.8%). This analysis suggests an optimal PSA threshold of > 1.09 ng/mL or a PSAdT of < 3.8 months when the PSA is below 1.0 ng/mL as independent predictors of positive findings.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy and consistency of a gradient-based positron emission tomography (PET) segmentation method, GRADIENT, compared with manual (MANUAL) and constant threshold (THRESHOLD) methods. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Contouring accuracy was evaluated with sphere phantoms and clinically realistic Monte Carlo PET phantoms of the thorax. The sphere phantoms were 10-37 mm in diameter and were acquired at five institutions emulating clinical conditions. One institution also acquired a sphere phantom with multiple source-to-background ratios of 2:1, 5:1, 10:1, 20:1, and 70:1. One observer segmented (contoured) each sphere with GRADIENT and THRESHOLD from 25% to 50% at 5% increments. Subsequently, seven physicians segmented 31 lesions (7-264 mL) from 25 digital thorax phantoms using GRADIENT, THRESHOLD, and MANUAL. RESULTS: For spheres <20 mm in diameter, GRADIENT was the most accurate with a mean absolute % error in diameter of 8.15% (10.2% SD) compared with 49.2% (51.1% SD) for 45% THRESHOLD (p < 0.005). For larger spheres, the methods were statistically equivalent. For varying source-to-background ratios, GRADIENT was the most accurate for spheres >20 mm (p < 0.065) and <20 mm (p < 0.015). For digital thorax phantoms, GRADIENT was the most accurate (p < 0.01), with a mean absolute % error in volume of 10.99% (11.9% SD), followed by 25% THRESHOLD at 17.5% (29.4% SD), and MANUAL at 19.5% (17.2% SD). GRADIENT had the least systematic bias, with a mean % error in volume of -0.05% (16.2% SD) compared with 25% THRESHOLD at -2.1% (34.2% SD) and MANUAL at -16.3% (20.2% SD; p value <0.01). Interobserver variability was reduced using GRADIENT compared with both 25% THRESHOLD and MANUAL (p value <0.01, Levene's test). CONCLUSION: GRADIENT was the most accurate and consistent technique for target volume contouring. GRADIENT was also the most robust for varying imaging conditions. GRADIENT has the potential to play an important role for tumor delineation in radiation therapy planning and response assessment.
