EJNMMI physics · 2026
Multicenter comparison of radionuclide calibrators and SPECT/CT protocols for quantitative 177Lu imaging in clinical practice.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Claeys Wies, Baete Kristof, Beels Laurence, Bernard Claire, Danieli Rachele, D'Asseler Yves, De Crop An, Hesse Michel, Nuttens Victor, Vanderlinden Bruno, Koole Michel
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Following the clinical success of [Formula: see text]-based therapies for neuroendocrine tumors and prostate cancer, accurate quantification of [Formula: see text] using radionuclide calibrators (RNCs) and SPECT/CT is gaining importance as prerequisite for accurate treatment delivery and dosimetry. However, the lack of standardization can introduce inter-system variability, compromising multi-center clinical trials. This study aimed to assess the accuracy and variability of [Formula: see text] measurements using RNCs and SPECT/CT across different systems and hospitals.
METHODS: A uniform cylindrical phantom and a NEMA phantom with hot spheres were prepared using traceable activities and imaged at 8 different hospitals using 13 SPECT/CT systems (9 conventional and 4 3D CZT). Acquisitions and reconstructions were performed using both site-specific and standardized protocols. The cylindrical phantom images were used to evaluate the system calibration and establish image calibration factors (ICFs), the NEMA images to evaluate effective resolution by calculating recovery coefficients (RCs). In parallel, two vials were measured to test RNC accuracy.
RESULTS: RNC measurements differed up to 11% between centers, while SPECT quantification of the cylindrical phantom differed up to 20%. While ICFs were consistent for systems of the same type, image quality varied strongly when using clinical protocols (36% difference in RCs in the largest sphere). Standardized reconstruction reduced variability in RCs for each system type (maximum 12% difference), regardless of acquisition protocol, but differences between system types persisted when standardizing acquisition and reconstruction (33% difference).
CONCLUSION: Current [Formula: see text] measurement practices yield significant variability in quantification and image quality. Harmonization efforts should prioritize standardized calibration and reconstruction protocols to improve multicenter reproducibility of quantitative [Formula: see text]-SPECT/CT.
METHODS: A uniform cylindrical phantom and a NEMA phantom with hot spheres were prepared using traceable activities and imaged at 8 different hospitals using 13 SPECT/CT systems (9 conventional and 4 3D CZT). Acquisitions and reconstructions were performed using both site-specific and standardized protocols. The cylindrical phantom images were used to evaluate the system calibration and establish image calibration factors (ICFs), the NEMA images to evaluate effective resolution by calculating recovery coefficients (RCs). In parallel, two vials were measured to test RNC accuracy.
RESULTS: RNC measurements differed up to 11% between centers, while SPECT quantification of the cylindrical phantom differed up to 20%. While ICFs were consistent for systems of the same type, image quality varied strongly when using clinical protocols (36% difference in RCs in the largest sphere). Standardized reconstruction reduced variability in RCs for each system type (maximum 12% difference), regardless of acquisition protocol, but differences between system types persisted when standardizing acquisition and reconstruction (33% difference).
CONCLUSION: Current [Formula: see text] measurement practices yield significant variability in quantification and image quality. Harmonization efforts should prioritize standardized calibration and reconstruction protocols to improve multicenter reproducibility of quantitative [Formula: see text]-SPECT/CT.