Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography Standardized Uptake Values in Clinical Practice and Assessing Response to Therapy
Open accessAbstract
The use of standardized uptake values (SUVs) is now common place in clinical 2-deoxy-2-[(18)F] fluoro-D-glucose (FDG) position emission tomography-computed tomography oncology imaging and has a specific role in assessing patient response to cancer therapy. Ideally, the use of SUVs removes variability introduced by differences in patient size and the amount of injected FDG. However, in practice there are several sources of bias and variance that are introduced in the measurement of FDG uptake in tumors and also in the conversion of the image count data to SUVs. In this article the overall imaging process is reviewed and estimates of the magnitude of errors, where known, are given. Recommendations are provided for best practices in improving SUV accuracy.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Using quantitative PET for patient selection is difficult in clinical practice because SUV measurements not obtained in a well-conducted clinical trial are subject to variability due to technical factors such as the PET scanner used and the acquisition and reconstruction parameters.
“Using quantitative PET for patient selection is difficult in clinical practice because SUV measurements not obtained in a well-conducted clinical trial are subject to variability. This is because of technical factors such as the PET scanner used and the acquisition and reconstruction parameters (23–26).”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
From RECIST to PERCIST: Evolving Considerations for PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors
Wahl, R. L., Jacene, H., Kasamon, Y., & Lodge, M. A. (2009) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.108.057307 · Cited by 3,777 · see citing works
Molecular imaging of cancer with positron emission tomography
Gambhir, S. S. (2002) · Nature reviews. Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc882 · Cited by 1,658 · see citing works
Partial-Volume Effect in PET Tumor Imaging
Soret, M., Bacharach, S. L., & Buvat, I. (2007) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.106.035774 · Cited by 1,575 · see citing works
Juweid, M., Stroobants, S., Hoekstra, O., Mottaghy, F., Dietlein, M., Guermazi, A., Wiseman, G., Kostakoglu, L., Scheidhauer, K., Buck, A., et al. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2006.08.2305 · Cited by 1,377 · see citing works
FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0
Boellaard, R., O’Doherty, M. J., Weber, W., Mottaghy, F. M., Lonsdale, M. N., Stroobants, S. G., Oyen, W. J. G., Kotzerke, J., Hoekstra, O. S., Pruim, J., et al. (2009) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-009-1297-4 · Cited by 1,329 · see citing works
Recommendations on the Use of 18 F-FDG PET in Oncology
Fletcher, J. W., Djulbegović, B., Soares, H. P., Siegel, B. A., Lowe, V. J., Lyman, G. H., Coleman, R. E., Wahl, R. L., Paschold, J. C., Avril, N. E., et al. (2008) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.107.047787 · Cited by 1,097 · see citing works
Self-citationStandards for PET Image Acquisition and Quantitative Data Analysis
Boellaard, R. (2009) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.108.057182 · Cited by 906 · see citing works
SUV: standard uptake or silly useless value?
Keyes, J. W. (1995) · PubMed · Cited by 803 · see citing works
Shankar, L. K., Hoffman, J. M., Bacharach, S. L., Graham, M. M., Karp, J. S., Lammertsma, A. A., Larson, S. M., Mankoff, D. A., Siegel, B. A., den Abbeele, A. V., et al. (2006) · PubMed · Cited by 677 · see citing works
Progress and Promise of FDG-PET Imaging for Cancer Patient Management and Oncologic Drug Development
Kelloff, G. J., Hoffman, J. M., Johnson, B. E., Scher, H. I., Siegel, B. A., Cheng, E. Y., Cheson, B. D., O’Shaughnessy, J., Guyton, K. Z., Mankoff, D. A., et al. (2005) · Clinical Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-04-2626 · Cited by 672 · see citing works
A Systematic Review of the Factors Affecting Accuracy of SUV Measurements
Adams, M. C., Turkington, T. G., Wilson, J. M., & Wong, T. Z. (2010) · American Journal of Roentgenology · doi:10.2214/ajr.10.4923 · Cited by 662 · see citing works
(2004) · PubMed · Cited by 653 · see citing works
Procedure guideline for tumor imaging with F-18 FDG PET/CT
Delbeke, D., Coleman, R. E., Guiberteau, M. J., Brown, M. L., Royal, H. D., Siegel, B. A., Townsend, D. W., Berland, L. L., Parker, J. A., Hübner, K. F., et al. (2006) · Cited by 620 · see citing works
(2005) · PubMed · Cited by 612 · see citing works
Larson, S. M. (1999) · Clinical Positron Imaging · doi:10.1016/s1095-0397(99)00016-3 · Cited by 599 · see citing works
Cherry, S. R., Sorenson, J. A., & Phelps, M. E. (2013) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-323-08299-0.00003-1 · Cited by 578 · see citing works
Strother, S. C., Casey, M., & Hoffman, E. J. (1990) · IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science · doi:10.1109/23.106715 · Cited by 549 · see citing works
Understanding the standardized uptake value, its methods, and implications for usage.
Thie, J. A. (2004) · PubMed · Cited by 532 · see citing works
X-ray-based attenuation correction for positron emission tomography/computed tomography scanners
Kinahan, P. E., Hasegawa, B. H., & Beyer, T. (2003) · Seminars in Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.1053/snuc.2003.127307 · Cited by 515 · see citing works
Self-citationHuang, S. (2000) · Nuclear Medicine and Biology · doi:10.1016/s0969-8051(00)00155-4 · Cited by 458 · see citing works
Reproducibility of metabolic measurements in malignant tumors using FDG PET.
Weber, W., Ziegler, S. I., Thödtmann, R., Hanauske, A.-R., & Schwaiger, M. (1999) · PubMed · Cited by 390 · see citing works
Ott, K., Fink, U., Becker, K., Stahl, A., Dittler, H., Busch, R., Stein, H., Lordick, F., Link, T., Schwaiger, M., et al. (2003) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2003.06.574 · Cited by 345 · see citing works
Respiratory Motion in Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography: A Review
Nehmeh, S. A., & Erdi, Y. E. (2008) · Seminars in Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2008.01.002 · Cited by 318 · see citing works
Cherry, S. R., Sorenson, J. A., Phelps, M. E., & Methé, B. M. (2004) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1118/1.1776595 · Cited by 316 · see citing works
Higashi, K., Clavo, A. C., & Wahl, R. L. (1993) · PubMed · Cited by 311 · see citing works
Procedure guideline for tumor imaging with 18F-FDG PET/CT 1.0.
Delbeke, D., Coleman, R. E., Guiberteau, M. J., Brown, M. L., Royal, H. D., Siegel, B. A., Townsend, D. W., Berland, L. L., Parker, J. A., Hubner, K., et al. (2006) · PubMed · Cited by 297 · see citing works
Krak, N., Boellaard, R., Hoekstra, O., Twisk, J., Hoekstra, C., & Lammertsma, A. (2005) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1 · Cited by 284 · see citing works
Minn, H., Zasadny, K., Quint, L. E., & Wahl, R. (1995) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiology.196.1.7784562 · Cited by 280 · see citing works
Assessing Tumor Response to Therapy
Weber, W. (2009) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.108.057174 · Cited by 269 · see citing works
Within-patient variability of (18)F-FDG: standardized uptake values in normal tissues.
Paquet, N., Albert, A., Foidart, J., & Hustinx, R. (2004) · PubMed · Cited by 257 · see citing works
Nahmias, C., & Wahl, L. M. (2008) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.108.054239 · Cited by 199 · see citing works
Measuring response in a post-RECIST world: from black and white to shades of grey
Michaelis, L., & Ratain, M. (2006) · Nature Reviews. Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc1883 · Cited by 197 · see citing works
on behalf of the Membership of the International Cancer Imaging Society, Husband, J. E., Schwartz, L. H., et al. (2004) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6601843 · Cited by 161 · see citing works
Image reconstruction for PET/CT scanners: past achievements and future challenges
Tong, S., Alessio, A. M., & Kinahan, P. E. (2010) · Imaging in Medicine · doi:10.2217/iim.10.49 · Cited by 142 · see citing works
Self-citationTylski, P., Stute, S., Grotus, N., Doyeux, K., Hapdey, S., Gardin, I., Vanderlinden, B., & Buvat, I. (2010) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.109.066241 · Cited by 141 · see citing works
Velasquez, L. M., Boellaard, R., Kollia, G. D., Hayes, W., Hoekstra, O. S., Lammertsma, A. A., & Galbraith, S. M. (2009) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.109.063347 · Cited by 135 · see citing works
Optimum scanning protocol for FDG-PET evaluation of pulmonary malignancy
Lowe, V. J. (1995) · Lung Cancer · doi:10.1016/0169-5002(95)90601-0 · Cited by 132 · see citing works
Technology Insight: advances in molecular imaging and an appraisal of PET/CT scanning
Weber, W., Grosu, A., & Czernin, J. G. (2008) · Nature Clinical Practice Oncology · doi:10.1038/ncponc1041 · Cited by 129 · see citing works
Beaulieu, S., Kinahan, P. E., Tseng, J. R., Dunnwald, L. K., Schubert, E. K., Pham, P., Lewellen, B., & Mankoff, D. A. (2003) · PubMed · Cited by 124 · see citing works
Self-citationBenz, M., Allen-Auerbach, M., Eilber, F., Chen, H. J. J., Dry, S., Phelps, M., Czernin, J., & Weber, W. (2008) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.108.053694 · Cited by 116 · see citing works
Nakamoto, Y., Zasadny, K., Minn, H., & Wahl, R. (2002) · Molecular Imaging and Biology · doi:10.1016/s1536-1632(01)00004-x · Cited by 115 · see citing works
Tumor delineation using PET in head and neck cancers: Threshold contouring and lesion volumes
Ford, E. C., Kinahan, P. E., Hanlon, L., et al. (2006) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1118/1.2361076 · Cited by 110 · see citing works
Self-citationThe impact of positron emission tomography (PET) on expected management during cancer treatment
Hillner, B. E., Siegel, B. A., Shields, A. F., Liu, D., Gareen, I. F., Hanna, L., Stine, S. H., & Coleman, R. E. (2008) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.24000 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Japanese guideline for the oncology FDG-PET/CT data acquisition protocol: synopsis of Version 1.0
Fukukita, H., Senda, M., Terauchi, T., Suzuki, K., Daisaki, H., Matsumoto, K., Ikari, Y., & Hayashi, M. (2010) · Annals of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.1007/s12149-010-0377-7 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Instrumentation factors affecting variance and bias of quantifying tracer uptake with PET/CT
Doot, R. K., Scheuermann, J. S., Christian, P. E., Karp, J. S., & Kinahan, P. E. (2010) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1118/1.3499298 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
Self-citationImpact of Intravenous Insulin on <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET in Diabetic Cancer Patients
Roy, F.-N., Beaulieu, S., Boucher, L., Bourdeau, I., & Cohade, C. (2009) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.108.056283 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Crippa, F., Gavazzi, C., Bozzetti, F., Chiesa, C., Pascali, C., Bogni, A., Sanctis, V. D., Decise, D., Schiavini, M., Cucchetti, G., et al. (1997) · Tumori Journal · doi:10.1177/030089169708300407 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
PET/CT Assessment of Response to Therapy: Tumor Change Measurement, Truth Data and Error
Kinahan, P. E., Doot, R. K., Wanner, M., Bidaut, L. M., Armato, S. G., Meyer, C. R., & McLennan, G. (2009) · Translational Oncology · doi:10.1593/tlo.09223 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Self-citationThe diagnostic utility of the lognormal behavior of PET standardized uptake values in tumors.
Thie, J. A., Hübner, K. F., & Smith, G. T. (2000) · PubMed · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Is quantitation necessary for oncological PET studies?
Coleman, R. E. (2001) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-001-0679-z · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Which reference tissue is best for semiquantitative determination of FDG activity
Perry, K. J., Tann, M. A., & Miller, M. E. (2008) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · Cited by 14 · see citing works
A Quantitative Approach to a Weight-Based Scanning Protocol for PET Oncology Imaging
Kinahan, P. E., Cheng, P. M., Alessio, A. M., et al. (2006) · 2006 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record · doi:10.1109/nssmic.2005.1596700 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Self-citationROHREN, E. M. (2010) · Seminars in Ultrasound CT and MRI · doi:10.1053/j.sult.2010.08.002 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Considerations for generic oncology FDG-PET/CT protocol preparation in drug development.
Hallett, W. A., Maguire, R. P., Tj, M., et al. (2007) · PubMed · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Lockhart, C., MacDonald, L., Alessio, A. M., et al. (2009) · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- [20]Rohren EM PET/CT Reporting in Radiation Therapy Planning and Response Assessment Seminars in Ultrasound, CT and MRI 2010 21147379
- [31]Roy FN Beaulieu S Boucher L Impact of intravenous insulin on 18F-FDG PET in diabetic cancer patients J Nucl Med 50 178 183 2009 19164226
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Predicting cancer outcomes with radiomics and artificial intelligence in radiology
Bera, K., Braman, N., Gupta, A., Velcheti, V., & Madabhushi, A. (2022) · Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1038/s41571-021-00560-7 · Cited by 819 · see citing works
A Systematic Review of the Factors Affecting Accuracy of SUV Measurements
Adams, M. C., Turkington, T. G., Wilson, J. M., & Wong, T. Z. (2010) · American Journal of Roentgenology · doi:10.2214/ajr.10.4923 · Cited by 662 · see citing works
Teoh, E. J., McGowan, D. R., Macpherson, R. E., Bradley, K. M., & Gleeson, F. V. (2015) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.115.159301 · Cited by 265 · see citing works
Quantification of amyloid PET for future clinical use: a state-of-the-art review
Pemberton, H. G., Collij, L. E., Heeman, F., Bollack, A., Shekari, M., Salvadó, G., Alves, I. L., Garcia, D. V., Battle, M., Buckley, C., et al. (2022) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-022-05784-y · Cited by 226 · see citing works
Okamoto, S., Thieme, A., Allmann, J., D’Alessandria, C., Maurer, T., Retz, M., Tauber, R., Heck, M. M., Wester, H.-J., Tamaki, N., et al. (2017) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.116.178483 · Cited by 213 · see citing works
EANM/EARL FDG-PET/CT accreditation - summary results from the first 200 accredited imaging systems
Kaalep, A., Sera, T., Oyen, W., Krause, B. J., Chiti, A., Liu, Y., & Boellaard, R. (2018) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-017-3853-7 · Cited by 174 · see citing works
Kuo, P. H., Morris, M. J., Hesterman, J., Kendi, A. T., Rahbar, K., Wei, X. X., Fang, B., Adra, N., Garje, R., Michalski, J. M., et al. (2024) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.233460 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
Howard, B. A., Morgan, R., Thorpe, M. P., Turkington, T. G., Oldan, J., James, O. G., & Borges-Neto, S. (2017) · Annals of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.1007/s12149-017-1192-1 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Sprinz, C., Zanon, M., Altmayer, S., Watte, G., Irion, K., Marchiori, E., & Hochhegger, B. (2018) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-20529-4 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Evidence-based management of incidental focal uptake of fluorodeoxyglucose on PET-CT
Pencharz, D., Nathan, M., & Wagner, T. L. (2018) · The British Journal of Radiology · doi:10.1259/bjr.20170774 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
The Added Value of Diagnostic and Theranostic PET Imaging for the Treatment of CNS Tumors
Pruis, I. J., van Dongen, G. A. M. S., & Veldhuijzen van Zanten, S. E. M. (2020) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms21031029 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
- Authors
- Kinahan, P. E., & Fletcher, J. W.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington (US)
- Indiana University School of Medicine (US)
- Corresponding author
- Kinahan, Paul E.
- Venue
- Seminars in Ultrasound, CT and MRI
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2010-12
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 496-505
- ISSN
- 0887-2171 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3026294
- OpenAlex
- W2413430220
- Cited by
- 631
- References
- 55
- Citations by year
- 2026: 40 · 2025: 56 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 53 · 2021: 49 · 2020: 55 · 2019: 50 · 2018: 55 · 2017: 47 · 2016: 46 · 2015: 39 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 0.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Seminars in Ultrasound CT and MRI (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Radiological Society of North America
- National Institutes of Health
- U.S. Public Health Service (24XS036-004)
- National Cancer Institute (R01CA074135, CA74135, R29CA074135, U01CA148131, CA 115870, R01CA115870)
- 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
- standardized uptake value, FDG PET/CT, treatment response assessment, PET quantification, tumor imaging
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Neoplasms, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Reproducibility of Results, Treatment Outcome, Radiopharmaceuticals, Fluorodeoxyglucose F18, Positron-Emission Tomography
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
