The impact of the xSPECT reconstruction algorithms on the recovery coefficients value for small tumors: a phantom study with ¹⁷⁷Lu

Abstract

Aim

Quantifying small tumors is still a challenge due to the partial volume effect (PVE). Although iterative reconstruction had promising results with a better recovery coefficient (RC), it suffers from the PVE. RC values typically depend on the reconstruction method, which may affect on ¹⁷⁷Lu quantifying. In this study, we investigated the effect of different reconstruction methods on RC values for ¹⁷⁷Lu SPECT/CT images.

Methods

A water-filled cylindrical polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) phantom without background radioactivity with two solid cylinders which represent the bone and soft tissue equivalent was used for SPECT/CT imaging. We placed syringes with different volumes containing ¹⁷⁷Lu in the vicinity of the cylinders as tumors. The iterative reconstructions of xSPECT, xSPECT Bone, and Flash3D was performed on SPECT/CT images.The effect of the reconstruction algorithms on the RC values was determined by calculating the radioactivity concentration in volumes of interest which were drawn manually and by a threshold method.

Results

The xSPECT Bone reconstruction has shown an RC value of approximately 100%, while the other reconstructions typically show an RC value of 93%. The RC values for all the reconstructions were decreased for smaller tumors. The smallest tumor showed a minimum RC between 52% and 72% compared to the largest tumor.

Conclusion

In this study, it was possible to obtain an RC value close to 100% when the xSPECT Bone reconstruction algorithm was used. The xSPECT results were slightly lower RC values compared to the Flash3D algorithm. In using standard RC curves for tumors close to the bone, special care has to be taken since RC values relative to bone are higher than in tissue.

Keywords

iterative reconstruction methods - recovery coefficient - phantom study - Lu-177 - xSPECT Bone

^* (These two authors share last authorship)

Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 28. April 2023

Angenommen nach Revision: 18. September 2024

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
11. Dezember 2024

• References

• 1 Sung H. et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J. Clin 2021; 71 (03) 209-249
• 2 Violet J. et al. Long-term follow-up and outcomes of retreatment in an expanded 50-patient single-center phase II prospective trial of ¹⁷⁷Lu-PSMA-617 theranostics in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. J Nucl Med 2020; 61 (06) 857-865
• 3 Brosch-Lenz J. et al. Influence of dosimetry method on bone lesion absorbed dose estimates in PSMA therapy: application to mCRPC patients receiving Lu-177-PSMA-I&T. EJNMMI Phys 2021; 8: 1-17
• 4 Sjögreen Gleisner K. et al. EANM dosimetry committee recommendations for dosimetry of ¹⁷⁷Lu-labelled somatostatin-receptor-and PSMA-targeting ligands. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2022; 49 (06) 1778-1809
• 5 Beauregard JM, Hofman MS, Pereira JM. et al. Quantitative ¹⁷⁷Lu SPECT (QSPECT) imaging using a commercially available SPECT/CT system. Cancer Imaging 2011; 11 (01) 56
• 6 Fendler WP. et al. Therapie mit ¹⁷⁷Lu-PSMA-617, Dosimetrie und Nachsorge beim metastasierten kastrationsresistenten Prostatakarzinom. Nuklearmedizin-NuclearMedicine 2016; 55 (03) 123-128
• 7 Fendler WP. et al. Preliminary experience with dosimetry, response and patient reported outcome after ¹⁷⁷Lu-PSMA-617 therapy for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Oncotarget 2017; 8 (02) 3581
• 8 Tran-Gia J, Salas-Ramirez M, Lassmann M. What you see is not what you get: on the accuracy of voxel-based dosimetry in molecular radiotherapy. J Nucl Med 2020; 61 (08) 1178-1186
• 9 Marquis H, Willowson KP, Bailey DL. Partial volume effect in SPECT & PET imaging and impact on radionuclide dosimetry estimates. Asia Ocean J Nucl Med Biol 2023; 11 (01) 44
• 10 Ma J, Vija AH. “Evaluation of quantitation accuracy for xSPECT”, in 2015 IEEE nuclear science symposium and medical imaging conference (nSS/MIC). IEEE 2015; 1-4
• 11 Duncan I, Ingold N. The clinical value of xSPECT/CT Bone versus SPECT/CT. A prospective comparison of 200 scans. Eur J hybrid imaging 2018; 2: 1-12
• 12 Miyaji N. et al. Phantom and clinical evaluation of bone SPECT/CT image reconstruction with xSPECT algorithm. EJNMMI Res 2020; 10: 1-12
• 13 De Nijs R, Lagerburg V, Klausen TL. et al. Improving quantitative dosimetry in ¹⁷⁷Lu-DOTATATE SPECT by energy window-based scatter corrections. Nucl Med Commun 2014; 35 (05) 522-533
• 14 de Nijs R. A novel model-based equation for size dependent mean recovery coefficients for spheres and other shapes. Phys Medica 2023; 116: 103174
• 15 Ljungberg M, Celler A, Konijnenberg MW. et al. MIRD pamphlet no. 26: joint EANM/MIRD guidelines for quantitative ¹⁷⁷Lu SPECT applied for dosimetry of radiopharmaceutical therapy. J Nucl Med 2016; 57 (01) 151-162
• 16 Kersting D. et al. Quantification performance of silicon photomultiplier-based PET for small 18F-, 68Ga-and 124I-avid lesions in the context of radionuclide therapy planning. Phys Medica 2023; 114: 103149
• 17 Peters SMB. et al. Towards standardization of absolute SPECT/CT quantification: a multi-center and multi-vendor phantom study”. EJNMMI Phys 2019; 6: 1-14