Advanced quantitative evaluation of PET systems using the ACR phantom and NiftyPET software.

PURPOSE: A novel phantom-imaging platform, a set of software tools, for automated and high-precision imaging of the American College of Radiology (ACR) positron emission tomography (PET) phantom for PET/magnetic resonance (PET/MR) and PET/computed tomography (PET/CT) systems is proposed. METHODS: The key feature of this platform is the vector graphics design that facilitates the automated measurement of the knife-edge response function and hence image resolution, using composite volume of interest templates in a 0.5 mm resolution grid applied to all inserts of the phantom. Furthermore, the proposed platform enables the generation of an accurate µ $\mu$ -map for PET/MR systems with a robust alignment based on two-stage image registration using specifically designed PET templates. The proposed platform is based on the open-source NiftyPET software package used to generate multiple list-mode data bootstrap realizations and image reconstructions to determine the precision of the two-stage registration and any image-derived statistics. For all the analyses, iterative image reconstruction was employed with and without modeled shift-invariant point spread function and with varying iterations of the ordered subsets expectation maximization (OSEM) algorithm. The impact of the activity outside the field of view (FOV) was assessed using two acquisitions of 30 min each, with and without the activity outside the FOV. RESULTS: The utility of the platform has been demonstrated by providing a standard and an advanced phantom analysis including the estimation of spatial resolution using all cylindrical inserts. In the imaging planes close to the edge of the axial FOV, we observed deterioration in the quantitative accuracy, reduced resolution (FWHM increased by 1-2 mm), reduced contrast, and background uniformity due to the activity outside the FOV. Although it slows convergence, the PSF reconstruction had a positive impact on resolution and contrast recovery, but the degree of improvement depended on the regions. The uncertainty analysis based on bootstrap resampling of raw PET data indicated high precision of the two-stage registration. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that phantom imaging using the proposed methodology with the metric of spatial resolution and multiple bootstrap realizations may be helpful in more accurate evaluation of PET systems as well as in facilitating fine tuning for optimal imaging parameters in PET/MR and PET/CT clinical research studies.

Correction to: Practical issues and limitations of brain attenuation correction on a simultaneous PET-MR scanner.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

Practical issues and limitations of brain attenuation correction on a simultaneous PET-MR scanner.

BACKGROUND: Despite the advent of clinical PET-MR imaging for routine use in 2011 and the development of several methods to address the problem of attenuation correction, some challenges remain. We have identified and investigated several issues that might affect the reliability and accuracy of current attenuation correction methods when these are implemented for clinical and research studies of the brain. These are (1) the accuracy of converting CT Hounsfield units, obtained from an independently acquired CT scan, to 511 keV linear attenuation coefficients; (2) the effect of padding used in the MR head coil; (3) the presence of close-packed hair; (4) the effect of headphones. For each of these, we have examined the effect on reconstructed PET images and evaluated practical mitigating measures. RESULTS: Our major findings were (1) for both Siemens and GE PET-MR systems, CT data from either a Siemens or a GE PET-CT scanner may be used, provided the conversion to 511 keV µ-map is performed by the PET-MR vendor's own method, as implemented on their PET-CT scanner; (2) the effect of the head coil pads is minimal; (3) the effect of dense hair in the field of view is marked (> 10% error in reconstructed PET images); and (4) using headphones and not including them in the attenuation map causes significant errors in reconstructed PET images, but the risk of scanning without them may be acceptable following sound level measurements. CONCLUSIONS: It is important that the limitations of attenuation correction in PET-MR are considered when designing research and clinical PET-MR protocols in order to enable accurate quantification of brain PET scans. Whilst the effect of pads is not significant, dense hair, the use of headphones and the use of an independently acquired CT-scan can all lead to non-negligible effects on PET quantification. Although seemingly trivial, these effects add complications to setting up protocols for clinical and research PET-MR studies that do not occur with PET-CT. In the absence of more sophisticated PET-MR brain attenuation correction, the effect of all of the issues above can be minimised if the pragmatic approaches presented in this work are followed.

Establishment of a UK-wide network to facilitate the acquisition of quality assured FDG-PET data for clinical trials in lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: Multicentre trials are required to determine how [fluorine-18]-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography imaging can guide cancer treatment. Consistency in quality control (QC), scan acquisition and reporting is mandatory for high-quality results, which are comparable across sites. METHODS: A national positron emission tomography (PET) clinical trials network (CTN) has been set up with a 'core laboratory' to coordinate QC and interpret scans. The CTN is involved in trials in Hodgkin's lymphoma [Randomised Phase III trial to determine the role of FDG-PET Imaging in Clinical Stages IA/IIA Hodgkin's Disease (RAPID) and Randomised Phase III trial to assess response adapted therapy using FDG-PET imaging in patients with newly diagnosed, advanced Hodgkin lymphoma (RATHL)] and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [Blinded evaluation of prognostic value of FDG-PET after 2 cycles of chemotherapy in diffuse large B-cell Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma, a sub-study of the R-CHOP-21 vs R-CHOP-14 trial (R-CHOP PET substudy)]. Approval to join requires scanner validation and agreement to follow a standard QC protocol. Scans are transferred to the core laboratory and reported centrally according to predetermined criteria. RESULTS: The qualification procedure was carried out on 15 scanners. All scanners were able to demonstrate the necessary quantitative accuracy, and following modification of image reconstruction where necessary, scanners demonstrated comparable recovery coefficients (RCs) indicating similar performance. The average RC (±1 standard deviation) was 0.56 ± 0.095 for the 13-mm sphere. Reports from 444 of 473 (94%) patients in RAPID and 67 of 73 (92%) patients in RATHL were available for randomisation of therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The CTN has enabled consistent quality assured PET results to be obtained from multiple centres in time for clinical decision making. The results of trials will be significantly strengthened by this system.