An External, Independent Validation of an<i>O</i>-(2-[<sup>18</sup>F]Fluoroethyl)-l-Tyrosine PET Automatic Segmentation Network on a Single-Center, Prospective Dataset of Patients with Glioblastoma

The goal of this study was to conduct an external, independent validation of an <i>O</i>-(2-[<sup>18</sup>F]fluoroethyl)-l-tyrosine ([<sup>18</sup>F]FET) PET automatic segmentation network on a cohort of patients with glioblastoma. <b>Methods:</b> Twenty-four patients with glioblastoma were included in this study who underwent a total of 52 [<sup>18</sup>F]FET PET scans (preradiotherapy, <i>n</i> = 23; preradiotherapy retest, <i>n</i> = 9; follow-up, <i>n</i> = 20). Biologic tumor volume (BTV) delineation was performed by an expert nuclear medicine physician and an automatic segmentation network. Physician and automated quantitative metrics (BTV, mean tumor-to-background ratio [TBR<sub>mean</sub>], lesion SUV<sub>mean</sub>, and background SUV<sub>mean</sub>) were assessed with Pearson correlation and Bland-Altman analysis (bias, limits of agreement [LoA]). Automated and physician segmentation overlap was assessed with spatial and distance-based metrics. <b>Results:</b> BTV and TBR<sub>mean</sub> Pearson correlation was excellent for all time points (range, 0.92-0.98). In 2 patients with frontal lobe lesions, the network segmented the transverse sinus. Bland-Altman analysis showed network underestimation of physician-derived BTVs (absolute bias, 2.7 cm<sup>3</sup>, LoA, -13.1-18.5 cm<sup>3</sup>; relative bias, 27.9%, LoA, -95.3%-151.2%) and deviations for TBR<sub>mean</sub> were small (absolute bias, 0.03, LoA, -0.25-0.30; relative bias, 0.83%, LoA -14.27%-15.93%). Median Dice similarity coefficient, surface Dice similarity coefficient, Hausdorff distance, 95th percentile Hausdorff distance, and mean absolute surface distance were 0.83, 0.95, 10.94 mm, 3.62 mm, and 0.88 mm, respectively. <b>Conclusion:</b> Automated quantitative analysis was highly correlated with physician assessment; however, volume underestimation and erroneous segmentations may impact radiotherapy treatment planning and response assessment. Further training on a representative local dataset would likely be required for multicenter implementation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Published
2025-04-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.124.268925
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Glioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.88
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

An External, Independent Validation of anO-(2-[18F]Fluoroethyl)-l-Tyrosine PET Automatic Segmentation Network on a Single-Center, Prospective Dataset of Patients with Glioblastoma

Pejman Rowshanfarzad, Nathaniel Barry, Eng‐Siew Koh, Ghulam Mubashar Hassan et al.
3 citations
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Glioma Diagnosis and Treatment
4.88
article

An External, Independent Validation of anO-(2-[18F]Fluoroethyl)-l-Tyrosine PET Automatic Segmentation Network on a Single-Center, Prospective Dataset of Patients with Glioblastoma

Pejman Rowshanfarzad, Nathaniel Barry, Eng‐Siew Koh, Ghulam Mubashar Hassan, Roslyn J. Francis, Robin Gutsche, Norbert Galldiks, Jake Kendrick, Nicholas Bucknell, Karl‐Josef Langen, Martin A. Ebert, Andrew Mark Scott, Philipp Lohmann, Keith George Ciantar
article en
3 citations

Abstract

The goal of this study was to conduct an external, independent validation of an <i>O</i>-(2-[<sup>18</sup>F]fluoroethyl)-l-tyrosine ([<sup>18</sup>F]FET) PET automatic segmentation network on a cohort of patients with glioblastoma. <b>Methods:</b> Twenty-four patients with glioblastoma were included in this study who underwent a total of 52 [<sup>18</sup>F]FET PET scans (preradiotherapy, <i>n</i> = 23; preradiotherapy retest, <i>n</i> = 9; follow-up, <i>n</i> = 20). Biologic tumor volume (BTV) delineation was performed by an expert nuclear medicine physician and an automatic segmentation network. Physician and automated quantitative metrics (BTV, mean tumor-to-background ratio [TBR<sub>mean</sub>], lesion SUV<sub>mean</sub>, and background SUV<sub>mean</sub>) were assessed with Pearson correlation and Bland-Altman analysis (bias, limits of agreement [LoA]). Automated and physician segmentation overlap was assessed with spatial and distance-based metrics. <b>Results:</b> BTV and TBR<sub>mean</sub> Pearson correlation was excellent for all time points (range, 0.92-0.98). In 2 patients with frontal lobe lesions, the network segmented the transverse sinus. Bland-Altman analysis showed network underestimation of physician-derived BTVs (absolute bias, 2.7 cm<sup>3</sup>, LoA, -13.1-18.5 cm<sup>3</sup>; relative bias, 27.9%, LoA, -95.3%-151.2%) and deviations for TBR<sub>mean</sub> were small (absolute bias, 0.03, LoA, -0.25-0.30; relative bias, 0.83%, LoA -14.27%-15.93%). Median Dice similarity coefficient, surface Dice similarity coefficient, Hausdorff distance, 95th percentile Hausdorff distance, and mean absolute surface distance were 0.83, 0.95, 10.94 mm, 3.62 mm, and 0.88 mm, respectively. <b>Conclusion:</b> Automated quantitative analysis was highly correlated with physician assessment; however, volume underestimation and erroneous segmentations may impact radiotherapy treatment planning and response assessment. Further training on a representative local dataset would likely be required for multicenter implementation.

Journal of Nuclear MedicineVol. 66(6)
The University of Melbourne (AU), Forschungszentrum Jülich (DE), The University of Western Australia (AU), University of Cologne (DE), La Trobe University (AU), Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital (AU), Liverpool Hospital (AU), Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital (AU), UNSW Sydney (AU), Integrated Oncology (United States) (US), Centre for Cancer Biology (AU), University Hospital Cologne (DE), Olivia Newton-John Cancer Wellness & Research Centre (AU), Western Australian Marine Science Institution (AU), Austin Health (AU), RWTH Aachen University (DE)
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Glioma Diagnosis and Treatment
4.88
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.