Accuracy of dose calibrators for 68Ga PET imaging: unexpected findings in a multicenter clinical pretrial assessment

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorBailey, DLen_AU
dc.contributor.authorHofman, MSen_AU
dc.contributor.authorForwood, NJen_AU
dc.contributor.authorO'Keefe, GJen_AU
dc.contributor.authorScott, AMen_AU
dc.contributor.authorvan Wyngaardt, WMen_AU
dc.contributor.authorHowe, Ben_AU
dc.contributor.authorKovacev, Oen_AU
dc.contributor.authorFrancis, RJen_AU
dc.contributor.authorARTneten_AU
dc.contributor.authorProPMSA Trial Investigatorsen_AU
dc.date.accessioned2023-09-07T01:10:41Zen_AU
dc.date.available2023-09-07T01:10:41Zen_AU
dc.date.issued2018-04en_AU
dc.date.statistics2023-06-06en_AU
dc.description.abstractWe report the discovery of a systematic miscalibration during the work-up process for site validation of a multicenter clinical PET imaging trial using 68Ga, which manifested as a consistent and reproducible underestimation in the quantitative accuracy (assessed by SUV) of a range of PET systems from different manufacturers at several different facilities around Australia. Methods: Sites were asked to follow a strict preparation protocol to create a radioactive phantom with 68Ga to be imaged using a standard clinical protocol before commencing imaging in the trial. All sites had routinely used 68Ga for clinical PET imaging for many years. The reconstructed image data were transferred to an imaging core laboratory for analysis, along with information about ancillary equipment such as the radionuclide dose calibrator. Fourteen PET systems were assessed from 10 nuclear medicine facilities in Australia, with the aim for each PET system being to produce images within 5% of the true SUV. Results: At initial testing, 10 of the 14 PET systems underestimated the SUV by 15% on average (range, 13%–23%). Multiple PET systems at one site, from two different manufacturers, were all similarly affected, suggesting a common cause. We eventually identified an incorrect factory-shipped dose calibrator setting from a single manufacturer as being the cause. The calibrator setting for 68Ga was subsequently adjusted by the users so that the reconstructed images produced accurate values. Conclusion: PET imaging involves a chain of measurements and calibrations to produce accurate quantitative performance. Testing of the entire chain is simple, however, and should form part of any quality assurance program or prequalifying site assessment before commencing a quantitative imaging trial or clinical imaging. © 2018 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imagingen_AU
dc.identifier.citationBailey, D. L., Hofman, M. S., Forwood, N. J., O’Keefe, G. J., Scott, A. M., van Wyngaardt, W. M., Howe, B., Kovacec, O., & Francis, R. J.; on behalf of ARTnet; and the ProPSMA Trial Investigators. (2018). Accuracy of dose calibrators for 68Ga PET imaging: unexpected findings in a multicenter clinical pretrial assessment. Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 59(4), 636-638. doi:10.2967/jnumed.117.202861en_AU
dc.identifier.issn2159-662Xen_AU
dc.identifier.issue4en_AU
dc.identifier.journaltitleThe Journal of Nuclear Medicineen_AU
dc.identifier.pagination636-638en_AU
dc.identifier.urihttps://apo.ansto.gov.au/handle/10238/15101en_AU
dc.identifier.volume59en_AU
dc.language.isoenen_AU
dc.publisherSociety of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (SNMMI)en_AU
dc.relation.urihttps://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.117.202861en_AU
dc.subjectPositron computed tomographyen_AU
dc.subjectStandardizationen_AU
dc.subjectGallium 68en_AU
dc.subjectCalibrationen_AU
dc.subjectAustraliaen_AU
dc.subjectRadioisotopesen_AU
dc.subjectNuclear medicineen_AU
dc.titleAccuracy of dose calibrators for 68Ga PET imaging: unexpected findings in a multicenter clinical pretrial assessmenten_AU
dc.typeJournal Articleen_AU
Files
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.63 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Journal Articles