The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology (핵의학기술)

The Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine Technology (대한핵의학기술학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Consideration of the Usefulness of 18F-FET Brain PET/CT in Brain Tumor Diagnosis

뇌종양진단에 있어 18F-FET Brain PET/CT의 유용성에 대한 고찰

  • Kyu-Ho Yeon (Deparment of Nuclear Medicine, Asan Medical Center) ;
  • Jae-Kwang Ryu (Deparment of Nuclear Medicine, Asan Medical Center)
  • 연규호 (서울아산병원 핵의학과) ;
  • 류재광 (서울아산병원 핵의학과)
  • Received : 2023.11.23
  • Accepted : 2023.12.23
  • Published : 2024.05.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: 18F-FET, a radiopharmaceutical based on a Tyrosine amino acid derivative using the Sodium-Potassium Pump-independent Transporter (System L) for non-invasive evaluation of primary, recurrent, and metastatic brain tumors, exhibits distinct characteristics. Unlike the widely absorbed 18F-FDG in both tumor and normal brain tissues, 18F-FET demonstrates specific uptake only in tumor tissue while almost negligible uptake in normal brain tissue. This study aims to compare and evaluate the usefulness of 18F-FDG and 18F-FET Brain PET/CT quantitative analysis in brain tumor diagnosis. Materials and Methods: In 46 patients diagnosed with brain gliomas (High Grade: 34, Low Grade: 12), Brain PET/CT scans were performed at 40 minutes after 18F-FDG injection and at 20 minutes (early) and 80 minutes (delay) after 18F-FET injection. SUVmax and SUVpeak of tumor areas corresponding to MRI images were measured in each scan, and the SUVmax-to-SUVpeak ratio, an indicator of tumor prognosis, was calculated. Differences in SUVmax, SUVpeak, and SUVmax-to-SUVpeak ratio between 18F-FDG and 18F-FET early/delay scans were statistically verified using SPSS (ver.28) package program. Results: SUVmax values were 3.72±1.36 for 18F-FDG, 4.59±1.55 for 18F-FET early, and 4.12±1.36 for 18F-FET delay scans. The highest SUVmax was observed in 18F-FET early scans, particularly in HG tumors (4.85±1.44), showing a slightly more significant difference (P<0.0001). SUVpeak values were 3.33±1.13 for 18F-FDG, 3.04±1.11 for 18F-FET early, and 2.80±0.96 for 18F-FET delay scans. The highest SUVpeak was in 18F-FDG scans, while the lowest was in 18F-FET delay scans, with a more significant difference in HG tumors (P<0.001). SUVmax-to-SUVpeak ratio values were 1.11±0.09 for 18F-FDG, 1.54±0.22 for 18F-FET early, and 1.48±0.17 for 18F-FET delay scans. This ratio was higher in 18F-FET scans for both HG and LG tumors (P<0.0001), but there was no statistically significant difference between 18F-FET early and delay scans. Conclusion: This study confirms the usefulness of early and delay scans in 18F-FET Brain PET/CT examinations, particularly demonstrating the changes in objective quantitative metrics such as SUVmax, SUVpeak, and introducing the SUVmax-to-SUVpeak ratio as a new evaluation metric based on the degree of tumor malignancy. This is expected to further contributions to the quantitative analysis of Brain PET/CT images.

Keywords

References

  1. Melissa L. Bondy, Michael E. Scheurer, Beatrice Malmer, Jill S. Barnholtz-Sloan, Faith G. Davis, Dora Il'yasova, et al. Brain Tumor Epidemiology: Consensus from the Brain tumor Epidemiology Consortium (BTEC). Cancer 2008;113(S7):1953-68. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.23741
  2. David N Louis, Arie Perry, Pieter Wesseling, Daniel J Brat, Ian A Cree, Dominique Figarella-Branger, et al. The 2021 WHO Classification of tumors of the Central Nervous System: a summary. Neuro-Oncology 2021;23(8):1231-51. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/noab106
  3. Akash Sharma, Jonathan McConathy. Overview of PET Tracers for Brain Tumor Imaging. PET Clinics 2013;8(2):129-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpet.2013.02.001
  4. Aristeidis H. Katsanos, George A. Alexiou, Andreas D. Fotopoulos, Pascal Jabbour, Athanasios P. Kyritsis, Chrissa Sioka. Performance of 18F-FDG, 11C-Methionine, and 18F-FET PET for Glioma Grading. Clinical Nuclear Medicine 2019;44(11):864-69. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0000000000002654
  5. Jun Yu, Jingwei Zheng, Weilin Xu, Jiaqi Weng, Liansheng Gao, Li Tao, et al. Accuracy of 18F-FDOPA Positron Emission Tomography and 18F-FET Positron Emission Tomography for Differentiating Radiation Necrosis from Brain Tumor Recurrence. World Neurosurgery 2018;114:1211-24.
  6. 서강록, 이정은, 고현수, 류재광, 남기표. 18F-FDOPA Brain PET/CT 검사의 영상 대조도 분석 및 섭취 시간에 따른 SUV변화 고찰. The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology 2019;23(1):69-74.
  7. Nathalie L. Jansen, Bogdana Suchorska, Vera Wenter, Christine Schmid-Tannwald, Andrei Todica, Sabina Eigenbrod, et al. Prognostic Significance of Dynamic 18F-FET PET in Newly Diagnosed Astrocytic High-Grade Glioma. The Journal of Nuclear Medicine 2015;56(1):9-16. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.114.144675
  8. Clemens Kratochwil, Stephanie E. Combs, Karin Leotta, Ali Afshar-Oromieh, Stefan Rieken, Jurgen Debus, et al. Intra-individual comparison of 18F-FET and 18F-DOPA in PET imaging of recurrent brain tumors. Neuro-Oncology 2014;16(3):434-40. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/not199
  9. 김석현, 김세희, 이경민, 고려진. [18F]플루오로에틸-L-티로신 양전자방출단층촬영/양전자방출전산화단층촬영 [18F] Fluoroethyl-L-tyrosine PET, PET/CT. 신의료기술평가 보고서 2018;1(10):1-109.
  10. Vincent Dunet, Anastasia Pomoni, Andreas Hottinger, Marie Nicod-Lalonde, John O. Prior. Performance of 18F-FET versus 18F-FDG-PET for the diagnosis and grading of brain tumors: systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuro-Oncology 2015;18(3):426-34.
  11. Dirk Pauleit, Gabriele Stoffels, Ansgar Bachofner, Frank W. Floeth, Michael Sabel, Hans Herzog, et al. Comparison of 18F-FET and 18F-FDG PET in brain tumors. Nuclear Medicine and Biology 2009;36(7):779-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucmedbio.2009.05.005
  12. Susan Mercieca, Jose Belderbos, Judith van Loon, Kenneth Gilhuijs, Peter Julyan, Marcel van Herk. Comparison of SUVmax and SUVpeak based segmentation to determine primary lung tumour volume on FDG PET-CT correlated with pathology data. Radiotherapy and oncology 2018;129(2):227-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2018.06.028
  13. Ryogo Minamimoto, Toshiyuki Saginoya, Chisato Kondo, Noriaki Tomura, Kimiteru Ito, Yuka Matsuo, et al. Differentiation of Brain Tumor Recurrence from Post-Radiotherapy Necrosis with 11C-Methionine PET: Visual Assessment versus Quantitative Assessment. journals.plos.org/plosone. Available at: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0132515. Accessed July 13, 2015.
  14. Karl-Josef Langen, Gabriele Stoffels, Christian Filss, Alexander Heinzel, Carina Stegmayr, Philipp Lohmann, et al. Imaging of amino acid transport in brain tumours: Positron emission tomography with O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (FET). Methods 2017;130(1):124-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymeth.2017.05.019
  15. M Weckesser, K J Langen, C H Rickert, S Kloska, R Straeter, K Hamacher, et al. O-(2-[18F]fluorethyl)-L-tyrosine PET in the clinical evaluation of primary brain tumours. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005;32(4):422-29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-004-1705-8
  16. Calcagni Maria Lucia, Galli Guido, Giordano Alessandro, Taralli Silvia, Anile Carmelo, Niesen Andreas, et al. Dynamic O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (F-18 FET) PET for Glioma Grading Assessment of Individual Probability of Malignancy. Clinical Nuclear Medicine 2011;36(10):841-47. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0b013e3182291b40
  17. Gabriele Popperl, Friedrich W Kreth, Jan H Mehrkens, Jochen Herms, Klaus Seelos, Walter Koch, et al. FET PET for the evaluation of untreated gliomas: correlation of FET uptake and uptake kinetics with tumour grading. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007;34(12):933-42.
  18. Gerard Moulin-Romsee, Eduard D'Hondt, Tjibbe de Groot, Jan Goffin, Raf Sciot, Luc Mortelmans, et al. Non-invasive grading of brain tumours using Dynamic amino acid PET imaging: does it work for 11C-methionine? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007;34(12):2082-87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-007-0557-4