Multicenter Reproducibility of 18F-Fluciclatide PET Imaging in Subjects with Solid Tumors.

UNLABELLED: Integrins are upregulated on both tumor cells and associated vasculature, where they play an important role in angiogenesis and metastasis. Fluciclatide is an arginine-glycine-aspartic acid peptide with high affinity for αvß3/αvß5 integrin, which can be radiolabeled for PET imaging of angiogenesis. Thus, (18)F-fluciclatide is a potential biomarker of therapeutic response to antiangiogenic inhibitors. The aim of this study was to evaluate the reproducibility of (18)F-fluciclatide in multiple solid-tumor types. METHODS: Thirty-nine patients underwent PET/CT scanning at 40, 65, and 90 min after injection of (18)F-fluciclatide (maximum, 370 MBq) on 2 separate days (2-9 d apart). Patients did not receive any therapy between PET/CT scans. (18)F-fluciclatide images were reported and quantitative measures of uptake were extracted using the PERCIST methodology. Intrasubject reproducibility of PET uptake in all measurable lesions was evaluated by calculating relative differences in SUV between PET scans for each lesion during the 2 imaging sessions. RESULTS: Thirty-nine measurable lesions were detected in 26 patients. Lesion uptake correlated strongly across imaging sessions (r = 0.92, P < 0.05, at 40 min; r = 0.94, P < 0.05, at 65 min; r = 0.94, P < 0.05, at 90 min) with a mean relative difference and SD of the relative difference of 0.006 ± 0.18 at 40 min, 0.003 ± 0.19 at 65 min, and 0.025 ± 0.20 at 90 min. This reflects 95% limits of repeatability of 35%-39% for the difference between the 2 SUV measurements or a variability of 18%-20% in agreement from that observed in well-calibrated multicenter (18)F-FDG studies. CONCLUSION: The test-retest reproducibility of (18)F-fluciclatide across multiple tumor types has been measured and shown to be acceptable. This is an important step in the development of this in vivo biomarker to identify and quantify response to antiangiogenic therapy in cancer patients.

The clinical safety, biodistribution and internal radiation dosimetry of flutemetamol (¹8F) injection in healthy Japanese adult volunteers.

OBJECTIVES: The Phase I safety, biodistribution and internal radiation dosimetry study in adult healthy Japanese males of flutemetamol ((18)F) injection, an in vivo ß-amyloid imaging agent, is reported and compared with previously obtained Caucasian data. METHODS: Whole-body PET scans of 6 healthy volunteers (age 51.8-61.7 years) were acquired approximately 4 h post-injection (administered activity 102-160 MBq). Venous blood sampling determined (18)F activity concentrations in whole blood and plasma and high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) established the percentages of parent [(18)F]flutemetamol and its metabolites. Voided urine activity was recorded. The decay-corrected and normalised (18)F activity of 14 source organ regions as a function of time was entered into the OLINDA/EXM software to calculate the internal radiation dosimetry and effective dose of each subject following the MIRD schema. The pharmacokinetics, biodistribution and dosimetry profiles were compared to data obtained from a cohort of healthy Caucasian adult volunteers from a previous Phase I study of [(18)F]flutemetamol. RESULTS: Flutemetamol ((18)F) injection was well tolerated. The highest mean initial uptakes were measured in the liver (15.2%), lungs (10.2%) and brain (6.6%). The highest mean radiation absorbed doses were received by the gallbladder wall (366 µGy/MBq), upper large intestine (138 µGy/MBq) and small intestine (121 µGy/MBq). The mean effective dose was 34.9 µSv/MBq. HPLC analysis demonstrated that at 5-min post-injection about 75% of plasma (18)F radioactivity was in the form of parent [(18)F]flutemetamol, reducing to 8 and 2% at 25 and 90 min, respectively, giving rise to less lipophilic (18)F-labelled metabolites. Comparisons with the Caucasian cohort showed no differences that could be regarded as clinically significant. CONCLUSION: The clinical safety of [(18)F]flutemetamol demonstrated no differences of clinical significance in the pharmacokinetics, biodistribution and internal radiation dosimetry profiles between Caucasian and Japanese adults.

Differential effects of teriparatide on regional bone formation using (18)F-fluoride positron emission tomography.

Teriparatide increases skeletal mass, bone turnover markers, and bone strength, but local effects on bone tissue may vary between skeletal sites. We used positron emission tomography (PET) to study (18)F-fluoride plasma clearance (K(i)) at the spine and standardized uptake values (SUVs) at the spine, pelvis, total hip, and femoral shaft in 18 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Subjects underwent a 1-hour dynamic scan of the lumbar spine and a 10-minute static scan of the pelvis and femurs at baseline and after 6 months of treatment with 20 µg/day teriparatide. Blood samples were taken to derive the arterial input function and lumbar spine K(i) values evaluated using a three-compartment model. SUVs were calculated for the spine, pelvis, total hip, and femoral shaft. After 6 months treatment with teriparatide, spine K(i) values increased by 24% (p = .0003), while other model parameters were unchanged except for the fraction of tracer going to bone mineral (k(3)/[k(2) + k(3)]), which increased by 23% (p = .0006). In contrast to K(i) , spine SUVs increased by only 3% (p = .84). The discrepancy between changes in K(i) and SUVs was explained by a 20% decrease in (18)F(-) plasma concentration. SUVs increased by 37% at the femoral shaft (p = .0019), 20% at the total hip (p = .032), and 11% at the pelvis (p = .070). Changes in bone turnover markers and BMD were consistent with previous trials. We conclude that the changes in bone formation rate during teriparatide treatment as measured by (18)F(-) PET differ at different skeletal sites, with larger increases in cortical bone than at trabecular sites.

Concordance between four European centres of PET reporting criteria designed for use in multicentre trials in Hodgkin lymphoma.

PURPOSE: To determine if PET reporting criteria for the Response Adapted Treatment in Hodgkin Lymphoma (RATHL) trial could enable satisfactory agreement to be reached between 'core' laboratories operating in different countries. METHODS: Four centres reported scans from 50 patients with stage II-IV HL, acquired before and after two cycles of Adriamycin/bleomycin/vinblastine/dacarbazine. A five-point scale was used to score response scans using 'normal' mediastinum and liver as reference levels. Centres read scans independently of each other. The level of agreement between centres was determined assuming (1) that uptake in sites involved at diagnosis that was higher than liver uptake represented disease (conservative reading), and (2) that uptake in sites involved at diagnosis that was higher than mediastinal uptake represented disease (sensitive reading). RESULTS: There was agreement that the response scan was 'positive' or 'negative' for lymphoma in 44 patients with a conservative reading and in 41 patients with a sensitive reading. Kappa was 0.85 (95% CI 0.74-0.96) for conservative reading and 0.79 (95% CI 0.67-0.90) for sensitive reading. Agreement was reached in 46 and 44 patients after discussion for the conservative and sensitive readings, respectively. CONCLUSION: The criteria developed for reporting in the RATHL trial are sufficiently robust to be used in a multicentre setting.

Use of the CT component of PET-CT to improve PET-MR registration: demonstration in soft-tissue sarcoma.

We have investigated improvements to PET-MR image registration offered by PET-CT scanning. Ten subjects with suspected soft-tissue sarcomas were scanned with an in-line PET-CT and a clinical MR scanner. PET to CT, CT to MR and PET to MR image registrations were performed using a rigid-body external marker technique and rigid and non-rigid voxel-similarity algorithms. PET-MR registration was also performed using transformations derived from the registration of CT to MR. The external marker technique gave fiducial registration errors of 2.1 mm, 5.1 mm and 5.3 mm for PET-CT, PET-MR and CT-MR registration. Target registration errors were 3.9 mm, 9.0 mm and 9.3 mm, respectively. Voxel-based algorithms were evaluated by measuring the distance between corresponding fiducials after registration. Registration errors of 6.4 mm, 14.5 mm and 9.5 mm, respectively, for PET-CT, PET-MR and CT-MR were observed for rigid-body registration while non-rigid registration gave errors of 6.8 mm, 16.3 mm and 7.6 mm for the same modality combinations. The application of rigid and non-rigid CT to MR transformations to accompanying PET data gives significantly reduced PET-MR errors of 10.0 mm and 8.5 mm, respectively. Visual comparison by two independent observers confirmed the improvement over direct PET-MR registration. We conclude that PET-MR registration can be more accurately and reliably achieved using the hybrid technique described than through direct rigid-body registration of PET to MR.

PET-MR image fusion in soft tissue sarcoma: accuracy, reliability and practicality of interactive point-based and automated mutual information techniques.

The fusion of functional positron emission tomography (PET) data with anatomical magnetic resonance (MR) or computed tomography images, using a variety of interactive and automated techniques, is becoming commonplace, with the technique of choice dependent on the specific application. The case of PET-MR image fusion in soft tissue is complicated by a lack of conspicuous anatomical features and deviation from the rigid-body model. Here we compare a point-based external marker technique with an automated mutual information algorithm and discuss the practicality, reliability and accuracy of each when applied to the study of soft tissue sarcoma. Ten subjects with suspected sarcoma in the knee, thigh, groin, flank or back underwent MR and PET scanning after the attachment of nine external fiducial markers. In the assessment of the point-based technique, three error measures were considered: fiducial localisation error (FLE), fiducial registration error (FRE) and target registration error (TRE). FLE, which represents the accuracy with which the fiducial points can be located, is related to the FRE minimised by the registration algorithm. The registration accuracy is best characterised by the TRE, which is the distance between corresponding points in each image space after registration. In the absence of salient features within the target volume, the TRE can be measured at fiducials excluded from the registration process. To assess the mutual information technique, PET data, acquired after physically removing the markers, were reconstructed in a variety of ways and registered with MR. Having applied the transform suggested by the algorithm to the PET scan acquired before the markers were removed, the residual distance between PET and MR marker-pairs could be measured. The manual point-based technique yielded the best results (RMS TRE =8.3 mm, max =22.4 mm, min =1.7 mm), performing better than the automated algorithm (RMS TRE =20.0 mm, max =30.5 mm, min =7.7 mm) when registering filtered back-projection PET images to MR. Image reconstruction with an iterative algorithm or registration of a composite emission-transmission image did not improve the overall accuracy of the registration process. We have demonstrated that, in this application, point-based PET-MR registration using external markers is practical, reliable and accurate to within approximately 5 mm towards the fiducial centroid. The automated algorithm did not perform as reliably or as accurately.