Format

Send to

Choose Destination
EJNMMI Res. 2019 May 7;9(1):37. doi: 10.1186/s13550-019-0506-9.

Diagnostic performance of the specific uptake size index for semi-quantitative analysis of I-123-FP-CIT SPECT: harmonized multi-center research setting versus typical clinical single-camera setting.

Author information

1
Department for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. r.buchert@uke.de.
2
Department of Nuclear Medicine, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany. catharina.lange@charite.de.
3
Department of Nuclear Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
4
Department for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.
5
Medical Radiation Physics and Nuclear Medicine, Imaging and Physiology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
6
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION:

The specific uptake size index (SUSI) of striatal FP-CIT uptake is independent of spatial resolution in the SPECT image, in contrast to the specific binding ratio (SBR). This suggests that the SUSI is particularly appropriate for multi-site/multi-camera settings in which camera-specific effects increase inter-subject variability of spatial resolution. However, the SUSI is sensitive to inter-subject variability of striatum size. Furthermore, it might be more sensitive to errors of the estimate of non-displaceable FP-CIT binding. This study compared SUSI and SBR in the multi-site/multi-camera (MULTI) setting of a prospective multi-center study and in a mono-site/mono-camera (MONO) setting representative of clinical routine.

METHODS:

The MULTI setting included patients with Parkinson's disease (PD, n = 438) and healthy controls (n = 207) from the Parkinson Progression Marker Initiative. The MONO setting included 122 patients from routine clinical patient care in whom FP-CIT SPECT had been performed with the same double-head SPECT system according to the same acquisition and reconstruction protocol. Patients were categorized as "neurodegenerative" (n = 84) or "non-neurodegenerative" (n = 38) based on follow-up data. FP-CIT SPECTs were stereotactically normalized to MNI space. SUSI and SBR were computed for caudate, putamen, and whole striatum using unilateral ROIs predefined in MNI space. SUSI analysis was repeated in native patient space in the MONO setting. The area (AUC) under the ROC curve for identification of PD/"neurodegenerative" cases was used as performance measure.

RESULTS:

In both settings, the highest AUC was achieved by the putamen (minimum over both hemispheres), independent of the semi-quantitative method (SUSI or SBR). The putaminal SUSI provided slightly better performance with ROI analysis in MNI space compared to patient space (AUC = 0.969 vs. 0.961, p = 0.129). The SUSI (computed in MNI space) performed slightly better than the SBR in the MULTI setting (AUC = 0.993 vs. 0.991, p = 0.207) and slightly worse in the MONO setting (AUC = 0.969 vs. AUC = 0.976, p = 0.259). There was a trend toward larger AUC difference between SUSI and SBR in the MULTI setting compared to the MONO setting (p = 0.073). Variability of voxel intensity in the reference region was larger in misclassified cases compared to correctly classified cases for both SUSI and SBR (MULTI setting: p = 0.007 and p = 0.012, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS:

The SUSI is particularly useful in MULTI settings. SPECT images should be stereotactically normalized prior to SUSI analysis. The putaminal SUSI provides better diagnostic performance than the SUSI of the whole striatum. Errors of the estimate of non-displaceable count density in the reference region can cause misclassification by both SUSI and SBR, particularly in borderline cases. These cases might be identified by visual checking FP-CIT uptake in the reference region for particularly high variability.

KEYWORDS:

Dopamine transporter; FP-CIT; SPECT; Semi-quantitative analysis; Specific binding ratio; Specific uptake size index

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Springer Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center