scanner validation via the snm clinical trials network phantom program paul e. christian molecular...
TRANSCRIPT
Scanner Validation via the SNM Clinical Trials Network Phantom
Program
Paul E. ChristianMolecular Imaging ProgramHuntsman Cancer Institute
University of Utah
Purpose:
Ensure scanner meets certain performance criterion needed for multi-center clinical trials via a clinical simulation phantom exercise.
Scanner Validation Sub-Committee
• PET lesion detectability not consistent across vendors.
• Imaging/processing protocols not consistent between sites.
• SUV measurements not consistent across vendors nor sites.
• PET data submitted to FDA for multi-center drug studies not deemed reliable.
• Goal: Generate measurement tool to validate reliable multi-center PET data
Validate scanner performance
Quality Control
• Dose Calibrator• CT Scanner
– CT checks– Calibration– Inspection
• PET Scanner– Blank scan– Constancy– PET and CT alignment– Record of PMs and calibrations
Scanner Constancy
Courtesy: Paul E. Christian
Commonly Used PET Phantoms
Commercial phantomsIECNEMA NU-2ACRINACRAAPMQIBACROs
NEMA-IEC NU-2 Phantom
68Ge resin filled phantom 270.8 day T1/2
4.6 mCi Bkgd 0.44 Ci/ml
Spheres 1.75 Ci/ml4:1 sphere/background ratioAtten Coeff 0.103 mm2/g at 511keV59+-7 HU
Ten Sites, Three vendors(GE 4-PET/CT, 2-PET; Philips 1-PET/CT; Siemens 3-PET/CT)
Maximum Absolute RC for 3D OSEM Clinic Scans
0
1
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Sphere Diameter (mm)
Ab
solu
te R
eco
very
Co
effi
cie
nt
(un
itle
ss)
Kinahan, Doot, U Wash.
CTN Oncology Chest Phantom
• Clinical simulator to measure:– Lesion detectability– Lesion quantitation– Image noise / texture
• Fill with F-18 FDG• Precision Filling Technique• Clinical Concentration• Fixed Lesion/Background
Ratio
CTN Oncology Chest Phantom
Repeat studies usinga precision filling
technique with F-18
Paul E. Christian, Keith Bigham, unpublished data 2008
Precision 18F Fillable Phantom
Biograph HiREZ SUVs
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Sphere Diameter (mm)
SU
Vb
w g
/ml Biog 1
Biog 2
Biog 3
Biog 4
Biog 5
Biog Average
Imaging Process
• Fill phantom (precise technique)• Performing imaging according
to prescribed protocol • Image after specific time delay• Reconstruction parameters• MD to identify lesions• Submit images for review
• Quantitative measurements (SUVmax and SUVave)• At site• At core lab
Evaluation Criterion:
Clinical Simulation Phantoms
Evaluate: Image performance-Accuracy of dose-Acquisition-Reconstruction/filter-Interpretation
# Lesions detectedLocation of detected lesionsSUV measurements (site)
-Verify SUVs at core lab-Evaluate DICOM images (core lab)
Image quality of PET/CT scanner-Uniformity-Resolution -Contrast-Noise-PET/CT alignment-Lesion detectability-Attenuation correction-Quantitative accuracy
Scanner Quantitative Validation
Assessment:
SUV background accuracyLesion SUV accuracyDICOM transfer validValidation of SUV DICOM
Scanner Validation Progress
- 17 scanners validated to date- 13 sites- 11 more sites have phantoms- 20+ additional sites scheduled
(worldwide expansion)
Scanner Validation
Site Problems
- DICOM image compatibility- Ability to provide quantitative images- Ability to provide accurate SUVs- Scanner operation/calibration- Dose calibrator
2010 Goals:
Testing brain imaging phantom
Scanner Validation Sub-Committee
2010 Goals:
Testing myocardial perfusion imaging phantom
(3 clinical scenarios)
Scanner Validation Sub-Committee
Accomplishments:
1. Development of scanner validation process
2. Implement review and quality assurance testing
3. Provide on-line phantom instructional video
4. Administration of oncology demonstration project
5. Oncology phantom imaging at 40+ sites
6. Development of myocardial perfusion phantom
7. Development of brain phantom
Scanner Validation Sub-Committee
2010 Goals:
1. Streamline phantom qualification program
2. Develop central archive for images
3. Develop process for long term maintenance and administration of phantom site qualification
4. Implement multi-site testing of brain and cardiac phantoms
Scanner Validation Sub-Committee