Abstract
2-deoxy-2- [18F] fluoro-d-glucose (FDG) PET is commonly used for the assessment of vessel wall inflammation. Guidelines for analysis of arterial wall FDG signal recommend the use of the average of maximal standardized uptake value (mean SUVmax) and target-to-blood (mean TBRmax) ratio. However, these methods have not been validated against a gold standard such as tissue activity ex vivo or net uptake rate of FDG (Ki) obtained using kinetic modeling. We sought to evaluate the accuracy of mean SUVmax and mean TBRmax for aortic wall FDG signal quantification in comparison with the net uptake rate of FDG.
Methods
Dynamic PET data from 13 subjects without prior history of cardiovascular disease who enrolled in a study of vascular inflammation were used for this analysis. Ex vivo measurement of plasma activity was used as the input function and voxel-by-voxel Patlak analysis was performed with t* = 20 minute to obtain the Ki image. The FDG signal in the ascending aortic wall was quantified on PET images following recent guidelines for vascular imaging to determine mean SUVmax and mean TBRmax.
Results
The Ki in the ascending aortic wall did not correlate with mean SUVmax (r = 0.10, P = NS), but correlated with mean TBRmax (r = 0.82, P < 0.001) (Figure 1B). Ki and Ki_max strongly correlated (R = 0.96, P < 0.0001) and similar to Ki, Ki_max did not correlate with mean SUVmax (r = 0.17, P = NS), but correlated with mean TBRmax (r = 0.83, P < 0.001).
Conclusions
Kinetic modeling supports the use of mean TBRmax as a surrogate for the net uptake rate of FDG in the arterial wall. These results are relevant to any PET imaging agent, regardless of the biological significance of the tracer uptake in the vessel wall.
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
2-deoxy-2- [18F] fluoro-d-glucose (FDG), a glucose analog used for positron emission tomography (PET) imaging, accumulates in cells with high glucose metabolic activity, such as inflammatory cells.1 Recently, the use of FDG PET for assessment of vessel wall inflammation has become a common practice. Guidelines for analysis of arterial wall FDG signal were recently published, and recommend the use of the average of maximal standardized uptake value (mean SUVmax) and target-to-blood (mean TBRmax) ratio, i.e., the ratio of SUVmax to blood activity measured as SUVmean inside large venous structures, such as the superior vena cava.2 However, these methods have not been validated against a gold standard such as tissue activity ex vivo, which cannot be determined in humans, or net uptake rate of FDG (Ki), which can be obtained using kinetic modeling. The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of mean SUVmax and mean TBRmax for aortic wall FDG signal quantification in comparison with the net uptake rate of FDG using dynamic imaging and kinetic modeling.
Methods and Results
We used the data from 13 subjects [median age 32 (range 28 to 45), median body mass index 31 (range 22 to 38 kg/m2)] without prior history of cardiovascular disease who enrolled in a study of vascular inflammation performed under protocols approved by Yale University and VA Connecticut Healthcare System Institutional Review Board committees.3 Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. The subjects were asked to follow a standard low carbohydrate diet to reduce myocardial FDG uptake. At the time of the study, the blood glucose level was ≤ 106 mg·dL−1 for all subjects. After a low dose non-contrast attenuation correction computed tomography scan, the subjects were administrated 344 ± 30 MBq of FDG and a 2-hour dynamic PET acquisition was performed on a Biograph mCT PET/CT scanner. During the 2-hour dynamic PET acquisition, the subjects first underwent a 6-minute dynamic single-bed scan over the heart (binned into 4 × 0.25 min, 4 × 0.5 min, 3 × 1 min) and then 18 continuous-bed-motion passes from head to pelvis (4 × 2 min, 13 × 5 min, and 1 × 30 min). Serial blood samples were collected throughout image acquisition and used to determine ex vivo whole blood and plasma activity. Dynamic PET images were reconstructed using ordered subset expectation-maximization algorithm (21 subsets, 2 iterations) incorporating point spread function and time-of-flight information with corrections for attenuation, scatter, random coincidences, and decay. The voxel size of the reconstructed image was 2.036 × 2.036 × 2 mm3. Ex vivo measured plasma time activity curve was fitted with sum of exponentials and used as the input function and voxel-by-voxel Patlak analysis was performed with t* = 20 min to obtain the Ki image. The FDG signal in the ascending aortic wall was quantified on PET images reconstructed from the final 30 minutes of acquisition, following recent guidelines for vascular imaging.2 Briefly, the SUVmax was measured on consecutive axial slices in the ascending aorta and averaged to obtain mean SUVmax; the mean TBRmax was calculated as the ratio of aortic mean SUVmax to blood pool activity measured in the superior vena cava and expressed as mean SUV.3 The mean Ki value in the entire ascending aortic wall was quantified on the Ki images using a population-based thresholding method. First, the mean and the standard deviation of blood Ki in the ascending aorta were calculated using data from all subjects. Then the mean Ki value in the ascending aortic wall was calculated for each subject using the voxels with Ki values above the threshold of mean plus 1.5-fold standard deviation of blood Ki. The mean Ki_max was determined on Ki images using the methodology recommended for determining the mean SUVmax.2 Statistical analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism 7. Pearson correlation was used to evaluate the relation between different variables. A P value less than 0.05 was considered significant.
Examples of SUV and Ki images are shown in Figure 1A. The mean Ki value in the ascending aortic wall was 4.57 ± 0.39 µL/min/cm3 and the mean SUVmax and mean TBRmax values measured on images from the last 30 min of image acquisition were 3.42 ± 0.37 g·cm−3 and 2.34 ± 0.29, respectively. The Ki in the ascending aortic wall did not correlate with mean SUVmax (r = 0.10, P = NS) but correlated with mean TBRmax (r = 0.82, P < 0.001) (Figure 1B). Ki and mean Ki_max strongly correlated (R = 0.96, P < 0.0001), with mean Ki_max being 1.78 ± 0.19-fold higher compared to mean Ki. Similar to Ki, mean Ki_max did not correlate with mean SUVmax (r = 0.17, P = NS) but correlated with mean TBRmax (r = 0.83, P < 0.001).
Discussion
Recent guidelines recommend the use of both mean SUVmax or mean TBRmax for analysis of FDG signal in the arterial wall.2 We used kinetic modeling to evaluate the net uptake rate of FDG in the arterial wall in a cohort of subjects without history of cardiovascular disease. Our study demonstrates that the net uptake rate of FDG in the arterial wall correlates with mean TBRmax but not mean SUVmax, supporting the use of TBRmax to evaluate FDG uptake in the arterial wall. These results are in accordance with similar analyses performed in other tissues4,5 or conceptualized on a theoretical level.6
The ability of PET imaging to provide quantitative measurement of tissue activity over time can be leveraged to assess radiotracers behavior via kinetic modeling. When FDG concentration is at a steady-state equilibrium between a reversible compartment and the plasma, the net influx rate (Ki) of FDG, assumed to be irreversibly trapped within the cellular compartment following its phosphorylation, can be estimated using Patlak analysis.7Ki relates to a relevant physiological parameter in the tissue, i.e., the glucose metabolic rate.8 The direct measurement of FDG tissue concentration ex vivo is not feasible in most clinical studies. The alternative, i.e., the determination of FDG tissue concentration on PET images and its normalization as SUV (or TBR) introduces a number of confounding factors to consider9; some of which shared with image-derived Ki determinations. The use of SUVmax (and TBRmax) to quantify FDG signal in the arterial wall suffers from the challenges associated with the small size of the arterial wall. Indeed, the normal ascending aorta wall thickness is ~ 1.5 mm,10 while the spatial resolution of clinical PET scanners is at best about 5 mm.11 The resulting partial volume effect results in an underestimation of the activity in the structure with higher activity (i.e., aortic wall) compared to the surrounding areas of lower activity.12 In this study, we used a thresholding method on Ki images to generate a VOI corresponding to the ascending aortic wall, based on a volume defined around the ascending aorta, with the assumption that, in this restricted volume, the aortic wall is the structure with the higher metabolic rate. Since kinetic modeling was performed on images subject to partial volume effect, the presented mean Ki value may also represent an underestimation of the metabolic rate of FDG in the aortic wall.
In this relatively young population with minimal cardiovascular risk factors, we did not evaluate the extent of atherosclerosis, and thus the source of FDG signal cannot be ascertained. Indeed, while vessel wall inflammation is often evaluated by FDG PET, a significant portion of the arterial wall FDG signal cannot be attributed to the presence of macrophages.13 Regardless of the cellular source of the signal, the arterial FDG signal in our dataset spanned the range of previously reported data,14 supporting broader validity of the correlations.
In conclusion, we show that mean TBRmax is superior to mean SUVmax as a surrogate of the net uptake rate of FDG in the arterial wall. These results are relevant to any PET imaging agent, regardless of the biological significance of the tracer uptake in the vessel wall.
New Knowledge Gained
Mean TBRmax is superior to mean SUVmax as a surrogate of the net uptake rate of FDG in the arterial wall.
Abbreviations
- CT:
-
Computed tomography
- FDG:
-
18F-fluorodeoxyglucose, 2-deoxy-2- [18F] fluoro-D-glucose
- PET:
-
Positron emission tomography
- SUV:
-
Standardized uptake value
- TBR:
-
Target-to-background ratio
References
Tarkin JM, Joshi FR, Rudd JH. PET imaging of inflammation in atherosclerosis. Nat Rev Cardiol 2014;11:443-57.
Bucerius J, Hyafil F, Verberne HJ, Slart RH, Lindner O, Sciagra R, et al. Position paper of the Cardiovascular Committee of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) on PET imaging of atherosclerosis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016;43:780-92.
Toczek J, Hillmer AT, Han J, Liu C, Peters D, Emami H, et al. FDG PET imaging of vascular inflammation in post-traumatic stress disorder: A pilot case-control study. J Nucl Cardiol 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-019-01724-w.
van den Hoff J, Oehme L, Schramm G, Maus J, Lougovski A, Petr J, et al. The PET-derived tumor-to-blood standard uptake ratio (SUR) is superior to tumor SUV as a surrogate parameter of the metabolic rate of FDG. Ejnmmi Res 2013;3:1-8.
Braune A, Hofheinz F, Bluth T, Kiss T, Wittenstein J, Scharffenberg M, et al. Comparison of static and dynamic F-18-FDG PET/CT for quantification of pulmonary inflammation in acute lung injury. J Nucl Med 2019;60:1629-34.
Keramida G, Peters AM. Tissue standardized uptake value is a closer surrogate of blood fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose clearance after division by blood standardized uptake value, illustrated in brain and liver. Nucl Med Commun 2019;40:552-4.
Patlak CS, Blasberg RG. Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants from multiple-time uptake data. Generalizations. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1985;5:584-90.
Spence AM, Muzi M, Graham MM, O’Sullivan F, Krohn KA, Link JM, et al. Glucose metabolism in human malignant gliomas measured quantitatively with PET, 1-[C-11]glucose and FDG: Analysis of the FDG lumped constant. J Nucl Med 1998;39:440-8.
Keyes JW Jr. SUV: Standard uptake or silly useless value? J Nucl Med 1995;36:1836-9.
Mensel B, Quadrat A, Schneider T, Kuhn JP, Dorr M, Volzke H, et al. MRI-based determination of reference values of thoracic aortic wall thickness in a general population. Eur Radiol 2014;24:2038-44.
Rausch I, Cal-Gonzalez J, Dapra D, Gallowitsch HJ, Lind P, Beyer T, et al. Performance evaluation of the biograph mCT flow PET/CT system according to the NEMA NU2-2012 standard. Ejnmmi Phys 2015;2:26.
Huet P, Burg S, Le Guludec D, Hyafil F, Buvat I. Variability and uncertainty of 18F-FDG PET imaging protocols for assessing inflammation in atherosclerosis: Suggestions for improvement. J Nucl Med 2015;56:552-9.
Al-Mashhadi RH, Tolbod LP, Bloch LO, Bjorklund MM, Nasr ZP, Al-Mashhadi Z, et al. (18)Fluorodeoxyglucose accumulation in arterial tissues determined by PET signal analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;74:1220-32.
van der Valk FM, Verweij SL, Zwinderman KA, Strang AC, Kaiser Y, Marquering HA, et al. Thresholds for arterial wall inflammation quantified by (18)F-FDG PET imaging: Implications for vascular interventional studies. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2016;9:1198-207.
Disclosure
Mehran M. Sadeghi is a consultant for Bracco Research USA. Jakub Toczek, Jing Wu, Ansel T. Hillmer, Jinah Han, Irina Esterlis, Kelly P. Cosgrove and Chi Liu have no conflict of interest to disclose.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
The authors of this article have provided a PowerPoint file, available for download at SpringerLink, which summarizes the contents of the paper and is free for re-use at meetings and presentations. Search for the article DOI on SpringerLink.com.
The authors have also provided an audio summary of the article, which is available to download as ESM, or to listen to via the JNC/ASNC Podcast.
Funding
This work was supported by the VA National Center for PTSD, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (K01AA024788), and National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH110674).
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Toczek, J., Wu, J., Hillmer, A.T. et al. Accuracy of arterial [18F]-Fluorodeoxyglucose uptake quantification: A kinetic modeling study. J. Nucl. Cardiol. 27, 1578–1581 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-020-02055-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-020-02055-x