Cited by 37Medical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsLung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging

Why harmonization is needed when using FDG PET/CT as a prognosticator: demonstration with EARL-compliant SUV as an independent prognostic factor in lung cancer

Houdu, Benjamin, Lasnon, Charline, Licaj, Idlir, Thomas, Guy, Do, Pascal, Guizard, Anne-Valerie, Desmonts, Cédric, Aide, Nicolas·2019·European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Abstract

Background To determine EARL-compliant prognostic SUV thresholds in a mature cohort of patients with locally advanced NSCLC, and to demonstrate how detrimental it is to use a threshold determined on an older-generation PET system with a newer PET/CT machine, and vice versa, or to use such a threshold with non-harmonized multicentre pooled data. Materials and methods This was a single-centre retrospective study including 139 consecutive stage IIIA-IIIB patients. PET data were acquired as per the EANM guidelines and reconstructed with unfiltered point spread function (PSF) reconstruction. Subsequently, a 6.3 mm Gaussian filter was applied using the EQ.PET (Siemens Healthineers) methodology to meet the EANM/EARL harmonizing standards (PSF EARL ). A multicentre study including non-EARL-compliant systems was simulated by randomly creating four groups of patients whose images were reconstructed with unfiltered PSF and PSF with Gaussian post-filtering of 3, 5, and 10 mm. Identification of optimal SUV thresholds was based on a two-fold cross-validation process that partitioned the overall sample into learning and validation subsamples. Proportional Cox hazards models were used to estimate age-adjusted and multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and their 95% confidence intervals. Kaplan-Meier curves were compared using the log rank test. Results Median follow-up was 28 months (1-104 months). For the whole population, the estimated overall survival rate at 36 months was 0.39 [0.31-…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00259-018-4151-8

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The test-retest variability of lesion SUVs has undermined attempts to establish widely adoptable SUV thresholds unless rigorous harmonization measures are followed.

    “This has undermined any attempts to establish widely adoptable SUV thresholds unless rigorous harmonization measures are followed [101,103,181].”

    From Influences on PET Quantification and Interpretation (2022) · cites this paper as [103]

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 27 · Cited by 37

Authors
Houdu, B., Lasnon, C., Licaj, I., Thomas, G., Do, P., Guizard, A.-V., Desmonts, C., & Aide, N.
Affiliations
  • Inserm (FR)
  • Centre François Baclesse (FR)
Corresponding author
Aide, Nicolas
Venue
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
Published
2018-09-14
Volume
46
Issue
2
Pages
421-428
ISSN
  • 1619-7070 (ISSN-L)
  • 1619-7089
OpenAlex
W2891141556
Cited by
37
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2
FWCI
3.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Keywords
FDG PET/CT, standardized uptake value, SUVmax cutoff, prognostic factors, non-small cell lung cancer, locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer, point spread function reconstruction, overall survival, EANM guidelines, lung cancer mortality
MeSH terms
Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography, Aged, Biological Transport, Calibration, Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung, Female, Humans, Lung Neoplasms, Male, Middle Aged, Prognosis, Reference Standards, Retrospective Studies, Fluorodeoxyglucose F18

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review