001     817964
005     20220930130104.0
024 7 _ |a 10.3390/cancers7010287
|2 doi
024 7 _ |a 2128/17155
|2 Handle
024 7 _ |a pmid:25635760
|2 pmid
024 7 _ |a WOS:000209951000010
|2 WOS
024 7 _ |a altmetric:3212484
|2 altmetric
037 _ _ |a FZJ-2016-04543
041 _ _ |a English
082 _ _ |a 610
100 1 _ |a Hussein, Amr
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 0
245 _ _ |a FDG-PET Response Prediction in Pediatric Hodgkin’s Lymphoma: Impact of Metabolically Defined Tumor Volumes and Individualized SUV Measurements on the Positive Predictive Value
260 _ _ |a Basel
|c 2015
|b MDPI
336 7 _ |a article
|2 DRIVER
336 7 _ |a Output Types/Journal article
|2 DataCite
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|b journal
|m journal
|0 PUB:(DE-HGF)16
|s 1548679473_6660
|2 PUB:(DE-HGF)
336 7 _ |a ARTICLE
|2 BibTeX
336 7 _ |a JOURNAL_ARTICLE
|2 ORCID
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|0 0
|2 EndNote
520 _ _ |a Background: In pediatric Hodgkin’s lymphoma (pHL) early response-to-therapy prediction is metabolically assessed by (18)F-FDG PET carrying an excellent negative predictive value (NPV) but an impaired positive predictive value (PPV). Aim of this study was to improve the PPV while keeping the optimal NPV. A comparison of different PET data analyses was performed applying individualized standardized uptake values (SUV), PET-derived metabolic tumor volume (MTV) and the product of both parameters, termed total lesion glycolysis (TLG); Methods: One-hundred-eight PET datasets (PET1, n = 54; PET2, n = 54) of 54 children were analysed by visual and semi-quantitative means. SUVmax, SUVmean, MTV and TLG were obtained the results of both PETs and the relative change from PET1 to PET2 (Δ in %) were compared for their capability of identifying responders and non-responders using receiver operating characteristics (ROC)-curves. In consideration of individual variations in noise and contrasts levels all parameters were additionally obtained after threshold correction to lean body mass and background; Results: All semi-quantitative SUV estimates obtained at PET2 were significantly superior to the visual PET2 analysis. However, ΔSUVmax revealed the best results (area under the curve, 0.92; p < 0.001; sensitivity 100%; specificity 85.4%; PPV 46.2%; NPV 100%; accuracy, 87.0%) but was not significantly superior to SUVmax-estimation at PET2 and ΔTLGmax. Likewise, the lean body mass and background individualization of the datasets did not impove the results of the ROC analyses; Conclusions: Sophisticated semi-quantitative PET measures in early response assessment of pHL patients do not perform significantly better than the previously proposed ΔSUVmax. All analytical strategies failed to improve the impaired PPV to a clinically acceptable level while preserving the excellent NPV.
536 _ _ |a 573 - Neuroimaging (POF3-573)
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-573
|c POF3-573
|f POF III
|x 0
588 _ _ |a Dataset connected to CrossRef
700 1 _ |a Furth, Christian
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 1
700 1 _ |a Schönberger, Stefan
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 2
700 1 _ |a Hundsdoerfer, Patrick
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 3
700 1 _ |a Steffen, Ingo
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 4
700 1 _ |a Amthauer, Holger
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 5
700 1 _ |a Müller, Hans-Wilhelm
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 6
700 1 _ |a Hautzel, Hubertus
|0 P:(DE-Juel1)132313
|b 7
|e Corresponding author
773 _ _ |a 10.3390/cancers7010287
|g Vol. 7, no. 1, p. 287 - 304
|0 PERI:(DE-600)2527080-1
|n 1
|p 287 - 304
|t Cancers
|v 7
|y 2015
|x 2072-6694
856 4 _ |u https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/817964/files/cancers-07-00287.pdf
|y OpenAccess
856 4 _ |u https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/817964/files/cancers-07-00287.gif?subformat=icon
|x icon
|y OpenAccess
856 4 _ |u https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/817964/files/cancers-07-00287.jpg?subformat=icon-1440
|x icon-1440
|y OpenAccess
856 4 _ |u https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/817964/files/cancers-07-00287.jpg?subformat=icon-180
|x icon-180
|y OpenAccess
856 4 _ |u https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/817964/files/cancers-07-00287.jpg?subformat=icon-640
|x icon-640
|y OpenAccess
856 4 _ |u https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/817964/files/cancers-07-00287.pdf?subformat=pdfa
|x pdfa
|y OpenAccess
909 C O |o oai:juser.fz-juelich.de:817964
|p openaire
|p open_access
|p OpenAPC
|p driver
|p VDB
|p openCost
|p dnbdelivery
910 1 _ |a Forschungszentrum Jülich
|0 I:(DE-588b)5008462-8
|k FZJ
|b 0
|6 P:(DE-HGF)0
910 1 _ |a Forschungszentrum Jülich
|0 I:(DE-588b)5008462-8
|k FZJ
|b 7
|6 P:(DE-Juel1)132313
913 1 _ |a DE-HGF
|b Key Technologies
|l Decoding the Human Brain
|1 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-570
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-573
|2 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-500
|v Neuroimaging
|x 0
|4 G:(DE-HGF)POF
|3 G:(DE-HGF)POF3
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0200
|2 StatID
|b SCOPUS
915 _ _ |a Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0
|0 LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBY4
|2 HGFVOC
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0600
|2 StatID
|b Ebsco Academic Search
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0501
|2 StatID
|b DOAJ Seal
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0500
|2 StatID
|b DOAJ
915 _ _ |a OpenAccess
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0510
|2 StatID
915 _ _ |a Peer Review
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0030
|2 StatID
|b ASC
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0300
|2 StatID
|b Medline
920 1 _ |0 I:(DE-Juel1)KME-20110218
|k KME
|l KME
|x 0
920 1 _ |0 I:(DE-Juel1)INM-4-20090406
|k INM-4
|l Physik der Medizinischen Bildgebung
|x 1
980 _ _ |a journal
980 _ _ |a VDB
980 _ _ |a I:(DE-Juel1)KME-20110218
980 _ _ |a I:(DE-Juel1)INM-4-20090406
980 _ _ |a APC
980 _ _ |a UNRESTRICTED
980 1 _ |a APC
980 1 _ |a FullTexts
981 _ _ |a I:(DE-Juel1)IBOC-20090406


LibraryCollectionCLSMajorCLSMinorLanguageAuthor
Marc 21