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
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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
- Update notices
- correction (2018-12-07)
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- 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