Home > Journals > The Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging > Past Issues > Articles online first > The Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2018 Jan 17

CURRENT ISSUE
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Cite this article as

THE QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE AND MOLECULAR IMAGING

A Journal on Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging


A Journal on Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
Affiliated to the Society of Radiopharmaceutical Sciences and to the International Research Group of Immunoscintigraphy
Indexed/Abstracted in: Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 2,481


eTOC

 

The Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2018 Jan 17

DOI: 10.23736/S1824-4785.18.03006-6

Copyright © 2018 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

SUV calculation in breast cancer: which normalization should be applied when using 18F-FDG PET?

Olivier HUMBERT 1, 2 , Jean-Marc RIEDINGER 3, 4, David CHARDIN 1, Isabelle DESMOULINS 5, François BRUNOTTE 3, 6, 7, Alexandre COCHET 3, 6, 7

1 Department of Nuclear Medicine, Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, Université Côte d’Azur, Nice, France; 2 TIRO-UMR E 4320, University of Nice-Sophia-Antipolis, Nice, France; 3 Department of Nuclear Medicine, Centre GF Leclerc, Dijon, France; 4 Departments of Biology and Pathology, Centre GF Leclerc, Dijon, France; 5 Department of Medical Oncology, Centre GF Leclerc, Dijon, France; 6 Imaging Department, CHU Le Bocage, Dijon, France; 7 Le2i FRE2005, CNRS, Arts et Métiers, Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, Dijon, France


PDF  


BACKGROUND: When using 18F-FDG PET, glucose metabolism quantification is affected by various factors. We aimed to investigate the benefit of different SUV normalizations to improve the accuracy of 18F-FDG uptake to predict breast cancer aggressiveness and response to treatment.
METHODS: Two hundred fifty-two women with locally advanced breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) were included. Women underwent 18F-FDG PET before and after the first course of NAC. Glucose serum levels, patient heights and weights were recorded at the time of each PET exam. Four different procedures for SUV normalization of the primary tumor were used: by body weight (SUVBW by blood glucose level ( SUVG, by lean body mass (SUL) and then corrected for both lean body mass and blood glucose level ( SULG).
RESULTS: At baseline, SUL was significantly lower than SUVBW (5.9±4.0 and 9.5±6.5, respectively; p<1.10-4), whereas SUVG and SUVBW were not significantly different (9.7±6.4 and 9.5±6.5, respectively; P=0.67). Concerning SUV changes (ΔSUV), the different normalizations methods did not induce significant quantitative differences. The correlation coefficients were high between the four normalizations methods of SUV1, SUV2 and ΔSUVB (R>0.95; p<1.10-4). High baseline SUVBW measures were positively correlated with the biological tumor characteristics of aggressiveness and proliferation (p<1.10-3): ductal carcinoma, high tumor grading, high mitotic activity, negative estrogen receptor status and the TNBC subtype. ΔSUVBW was highly predictive of pCR (AUC=0.76 on ROC curve analysis; p<1.10-4). The different SUV normalizations yields identical statistical results and AUC to predict tumor biological aggressiveness and response to therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: In the present setting, SUVBW and SUL can be considered as robust measures and be used in future multicentre trials. The additional normalization of SUV by glycemia involves stringent methodologic procedures to avoid biased risk measurements and offers no statistical advantages.


KEY WORDS: SUV - Correction - Normalization - Breast cancer - FDG PET

top of page

Publication History

Article first published online: January 17, 2018
Manuscript accepted: January 11, 2018
Manuscript revised: November 6, 2017
Manuscript received: June 19, 2017

Cite this article as

Humbert O, Riedinger JM, Chardin D, Desmoulins I, Brunotte F, Cochet A. SUV calculation in breast cancer: which normalization should be applied when using 18F-FDG PET?. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2018 Jan 17. DOI: 10.23736/S1824-4785.18.03006-6

Corresponding author e-mail

ohumbert@unice.fr