Optimal transformations leading to normal distributions of positron emission tomography standardized uptake values

被引:9
作者
Scarpelli, Matthew [1 ]
Eickhoff, Jens [2 ]
Cuna, Enrique [3 ]
Perlman, Scott [4 ]
Jeraj, Robert [1 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Wisconsin, Dept Med Phys, 1111 Highland Ave,Room 1005, Madison, WI 53792 USA
[2] Univ Wisconsin, Dept Biostat & Med Informat, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53792 USA
[3] CUDIM, Av Dr Americo Ricaldoni 2010, Montevideo 11600, Uruguay
[4] Univ Wisconsin, Dept Radiol, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53792 USA
[5] Univ Wisconsin, Carbone Canc Ctr, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53792 USA
关键词
FDG PET; FLT PET; SUV; tumors; normal distribution; CONFIDENCE-INTERVALS; YOUDEN INDEX; CANCER; PET; MULTICENTER; AXITINIB; TUMORS; POINT;
D O I
10.1088/1361-6560/aaa175
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
The statistical analysis of positron emission tomography (PET) standardized uptake value (SUV) measurements is challenging due to the skewed nature of SUV distributions. This limits utilization of powerful parametric statistical models for analyzing SUV measurements. An ad-hoc approach, which is frequently used in practice, is to blindly use a log transformation, which may or may not result in normal SUV distributions. This study sought to identify optimal transformations leading to normally distributed PET SUVs extracted from tumors and assess the effects of therapy on the optimal transformations. Methods. The optimal transformation for producing normal distributions of tumor SUVs was identified by iterating the Box-Cox transformation parameter (lambda) and selecting the parameter that maximized the Shapiro-Wilk P-value. Optimal transformations were identified for tumor SUVmax distributions at both pre and post treatment. This study included 57 patients that underwent F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose (F-18-FDG) PET scans (publically available dataset). In addition, to test the generality of our transformation methodology, we included analysis of 27 patients that underwent F-18-Fluorothymidine (F-18-FLT) PET scans at our institution. Results. After applying the optimal Box-Cox transformations, neither the pre nor the post treatment F-18-FDG SUV distributions deviated significantly from normality (P > 0.10). Similar results were found for F-18-FLT PET SUV distributions (P > 0.10). For both F-18-FDG and F-18-FLT SUV distributions, the skewness and kurtosis increased from pre to post treatment, leading to a decrease in the optimal Box-Cox transformation parameter from pre to post treatment. There were types of distributions encountered for both F-18-FDG and F-18-FLT where a log transformation was not optimal for providing normal SUV distributions. Conclusion. Optimization of the Box-Cox transformation, offers a solution for identifying normal SUV transformations for when the log transformation is insufficient. The log transformation is not always the appropriate transformation for producing normally distributed PET SUVs.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 24 条
[1]   Practice Statistics Notes Parametric v non-parametric methods for data analysis [J].
Altman, Douglas G. ;
Bland, J. Martin .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2009, 338
[2]   Compliance with PET acquisition protocols for therapeutic monitoring of erlotinib therapy in an international trial for patients with non-small cell lung cancer [J].
Binns, David S. ;
Pirzkall, Andrea ;
Yu, Wei ;
Callahan, Jason ;
Mileshkin, Linda ;
Conti, Peter ;
Scott, Andrew M. ;
Macfarlane, David ;
Fine, Bernard M. ;
Hicks, Rodney J. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE AND MOLECULAR IMAGING, 2011, 38 (04) :642-650
[3]  
Bland JM, 1996, BRIT MED J, V312, P770
[4]   AN ANALYSIS OF TRANSFORMATIONS [J].
BOX, GEP ;
COX, DR .
JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES B-STATISTICAL METHODOLOGY, 1964, 26 (02) :211-252
[5]   Pharmacodynamic study of axitinib in patients with advanced malignancies assessed with 18F-3'deoxy-3'fluoro-L-thymidine positron emission tomography/computed tomography [J].
Bruce, Justine Yang ;
Scully, Peter Colin ;
Carmichael, Lakeesha L. ;
Eickhoff, Jens C. ;
Perlman, Scott B. ;
Kolesar, Jill Marie ;
Heideman, Jennifer L. ;
Jeraj, Robert ;
Liu, Glenn .
CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY AND PHARMACOLOGY, 2015, 76 (01) :187-195
[6]  
Burton P, 1998, STAT MED, V17, P1261, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19980615)17:11<1261::AID-SIM846>3.0.CO
[7]  
2-Z
[8]   Correlation between Ki-67 immunohistochemistry and 18F-Fluorothymidine uptake in patients with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Chalkidou, A. ;
Landau, D. B. ;
Odell, E. W. ;
Cornelius, V. R. ;
O'Doherty, M. J. ;
Marsden, P. K. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2012, 48 (18) :3499-3513
[9]  
EFRON B, 1987, J AM STAT ASSOC, V82, P171, DOI 10.2307/2289144
[10]   Variability in PET quantitation within a multicenter consortium [J].
Fahey, Frederic H. ;
Kinahan, Paul E. ;
Doot, Robert K. ;
Kocak, Mehmet ;
Thurston, Harold ;
Poussaint, Tina Young .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2010, 37 (07) :3660-3666