Effects of ROI definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial
Purpose Quantitative measurement of tracer uptake in a tumour can be influenced by a number of factors, including the method of defining regions of interest (ROIs) and the reconstruction parameters used. The main purpose of this study was to determine the effects of different ROI methods on quantita...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Krak, Nanda C. [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2004 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Anmerkung: |
© Springer-Verlag 2004 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging - Heidelberg [u.a.] : Springer-Verl., 2002, 32(2004), 3 vom: 15. Okt., Seite 294-301 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:32 ; year:2004 ; number:3 ; day:15 ; month:10 ; pages:294-301 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
SPR003118622 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | SPR003118622 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230519162345.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 201001s2004 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)SPR003118622 | ||
| 035 | |a (SPR)s00259-004-1566-1-e | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Krak, Nanda C. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Effects of ROI definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2004 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a © Springer-Verlag 2004 | ||
| 520 | |a Purpose Quantitative measurement of tracer uptake in a tumour can be influenced by a number of factors, including the method of defining regions of interest (ROIs) and the reconstruction parameters used. The main purpose of this study was to determine the effects of different ROI methods on quantitative outcome, using two reconstruction methods and the standard uptake value (SUV) as a simple quantitative measure of FDG uptake. Methods Four commonly used methods of ROI definition (manual placement, fixed dimensions, threshold based and maximum pixel value) were used to calculate SUV ($ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $, $ SUV_{75} $ and $ SUV_{max} $, respectively) and to generate “metabolic” tumour volumes. Test–retest reproducibility of SUVs and of “metabolic” tumour volumes and the applicability of ROI methods during chemotherapy were assessed. In addition, SUVs calculated on ordered subsets expectation maximisation (OSEM) and filtered back-projection (FBP) images were compared. Results ROI definition had a direct effect on quantitative outcome. On average, $ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $ and $ SUV_{75} $, were respectively 48%, 27%, 34% and 15% lower than $ SUV_{max} $ when calculated on OSEM images. No statistically significant differences were found between SUVs calculated on OSEM and FBP reconstructed images. Highest reproducibility was found for $ SUV_{15 mm} $ and $ SUV_{[MAN]} $ (ICC 0.95 and 0.94, respectively) and for “metabolic” volumes measured with the manual and 50% threshold ROIs (ICC 0.99 for both). Manual, 75% threshold and maximum pixel ROIs could be used throughout therapy, regardless of changes in tumour uptake or geometry. SUVs showed the same trend in relative change in FDG uptake after chemotherapy, irrespective of the ROI method used. Conclusion The method of ROI definition has a direct influence on quantitative outcome. In terms of simplicity, user-independence, reproducibility and general applicability the threshold-based and fixed dimension methods are the best ROI methods. Threshold methods are in addition relatively independent of changes in size and geometry, however, and may therefore be more suitable for response monitoring purposes. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Standard Uptake Value |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Partial Volume Effect |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Order Subset Expectation Maximisation |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Threshold Method |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Maximum Pixel |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Boellaard, R. |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Hoekstra, Otto S. |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Twisk, Jos W. R. |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Hoekstra, Corneline J. |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Lammertsma, Adriaan A. |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging |d Heidelberg [u.a.] : Springer-Verl., 2002 |g 32(2004), 3 vom: 15. Okt., Seite 294-301 |w (DE-627)359787258 |w (DE-600)2098375-X |x 1619-7089 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:32 |g year:2004 |g number:3 |g day:15 |g month:10 |g pages:294-301 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1 |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_32 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_90 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_100 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_101 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_120 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_138 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_150 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_152 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_171 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_187 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_206 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_224 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_250 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_281 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_370 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_636 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_702 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2001 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2004 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2006 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2007 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2008 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2010 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2011 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2015 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2020 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2021 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2025 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2026 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2027 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2031 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2034 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2037 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2038 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2039 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2044 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2048 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2049 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2050 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2056 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2057 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2059 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2061 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2064 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2065 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2068 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2070 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2086 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2088 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2093 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2106 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2107 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2108 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2110 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2112 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2113 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2116 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2118 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2119 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2122 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2129 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2143 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2144 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2147 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2148 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2152 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2153 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2188 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2190 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2232 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2336 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2446 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2470 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2507 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2522 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2548 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4035 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4046 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4242 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4246 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4251 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4326 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4328 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4333 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4334 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4335 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4336 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4393 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 32 |j 2004 |e 3 |b 15 |c 10 |h 294-301 | ||
| author_variant |
n c k nc nck r b rb o s h os osh j w r t jwr jwrt c j h cj cjh a a l aa aal |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:16197089:2004----::fetorieiiinnrcntutomtooqatttvotoenapiaii |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2004 |
| publishDate |
2004 |
| allfields |
10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1 doi (DE-627)SPR003118622 (SPR)s00259-004-1566-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Krak, Nanda C. verfasserin aut Effects of ROI definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial 2004 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag 2004 Purpose Quantitative measurement of tracer uptake in a tumour can be influenced by a number of factors, including the method of defining regions of interest (ROIs) and the reconstruction parameters used. The main purpose of this study was to determine the effects of different ROI methods on quantitative outcome, using two reconstruction methods and the standard uptake value (SUV) as a simple quantitative measure of FDG uptake. Methods Four commonly used methods of ROI definition (manual placement, fixed dimensions, threshold based and maximum pixel value) were used to calculate SUV ($ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $, $ SUV_{75} $ and $ SUV_{max} $, respectively) and to generate “metabolic” tumour volumes. Test–retest reproducibility of SUVs and of “metabolic” tumour volumes and the applicability of ROI methods during chemotherapy were assessed. In addition, SUVs calculated on ordered subsets expectation maximisation (OSEM) and filtered back-projection (FBP) images were compared. Results ROI definition had a direct effect on quantitative outcome. On average, $ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $ and $ SUV_{75} $, were respectively 48%, 27%, 34% and 15% lower than $ SUV_{max} $ when calculated on OSEM images. No statistically significant differences were found between SUVs calculated on OSEM and FBP reconstructed images. Highest reproducibility was found for $ SUV_{15 mm} $ and $ SUV_{[MAN]} $ (ICC 0.95 and 0.94, respectively) and for “metabolic” volumes measured with the manual and 50% threshold ROIs (ICC 0.99 for both). Manual, 75% threshold and maximum pixel ROIs could be used throughout therapy, regardless of changes in tumour uptake or geometry. SUVs showed the same trend in relative change in FDG uptake after chemotherapy, irrespective of the ROI method used. Conclusion The method of ROI definition has a direct influence on quantitative outcome. In terms of simplicity, user-independence, reproducibility and general applicability the threshold-based and fixed dimension methods are the best ROI methods. Threshold methods are in addition relatively independent of changes in size and geometry, however, and may therefore be more suitable for response monitoring purposes. Standard Uptake Value (dpeaa)DE-He213 Partial Volume Effect (dpeaa)DE-He213 Order Subset Expectation Maximisation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Threshold Method (dpeaa)DE-He213 Maximum Pixel (dpeaa)DE-He213 Boellaard, R. aut Hoekstra, Otto S. aut Twisk, Jos W. R. aut Hoekstra, Corneline J. aut Lammertsma, Adriaan A. aut Enthalten in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging Heidelberg [u.a.] : Springer-Verl., 2002 32(2004), 3 vom: 15. Okt., Seite 294-301 (DE-627)359787258 (DE-600)2098375-X 1619-7089 nnns volume:32 year:2004 number:3 day:15 month:10 pages:294-301 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 32 2004 3 15 10 294-301 |
| spelling |
10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1 doi (DE-627)SPR003118622 (SPR)s00259-004-1566-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Krak, Nanda C. verfasserin aut Effects of ROI definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial 2004 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag 2004 Purpose Quantitative measurement of tracer uptake in a tumour can be influenced by a number of factors, including the method of defining regions of interest (ROIs) and the reconstruction parameters used. The main purpose of this study was to determine the effects of different ROI methods on quantitative outcome, using two reconstruction methods and the standard uptake value (SUV) as a simple quantitative measure of FDG uptake. Methods Four commonly used methods of ROI definition (manual placement, fixed dimensions, threshold based and maximum pixel value) were used to calculate SUV ($ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $, $ SUV_{75} $ and $ SUV_{max} $, respectively) and to generate “metabolic” tumour volumes. Test–retest reproducibility of SUVs and of “metabolic” tumour volumes and the applicability of ROI methods during chemotherapy were assessed. In addition, SUVs calculated on ordered subsets expectation maximisation (OSEM) and filtered back-projection (FBP) images were compared. Results ROI definition had a direct effect on quantitative outcome. On average, $ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $ and $ SUV_{75} $, were respectively 48%, 27%, 34% and 15% lower than $ SUV_{max} $ when calculated on OSEM images. No statistically significant differences were found between SUVs calculated on OSEM and FBP reconstructed images. Highest reproducibility was found for $ SUV_{15 mm} $ and $ SUV_{[MAN]} $ (ICC 0.95 and 0.94, respectively) and for “metabolic” volumes measured with the manual and 50% threshold ROIs (ICC 0.99 for both). Manual, 75% threshold and maximum pixel ROIs could be used throughout therapy, regardless of changes in tumour uptake or geometry. SUVs showed the same trend in relative change in FDG uptake after chemotherapy, irrespective of the ROI method used. Conclusion The method of ROI definition has a direct influence on quantitative outcome. In terms of simplicity, user-independence, reproducibility and general applicability the threshold-based and fixed dimension methods are the best ROI methods. Threshold methods are in addition relatively independent of changes in size and geometry, however, and may therefore be more suitable for response monitoring purposes. Standard Uptake Value (dpeaa)DE-He213 Partial Volume Effect (dpeaa)DE-He213 Order Subset Expectation Maximisation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Threshold Method (dpeaa)DE-He213 Maximum Pixel (dpeaa)DE-He213 Boellaard, R. aut Hoekstra, Otto S. aut Twisk, Jos W. R. aut Hoekstra, Corneline J. aut Lammertsma, Adriaan A. aut Enthalten in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging Heidelberg [u.a.] : Springer-Verl., 2002 32(2004), 3 vom: 15. Okt., Seite 294-301 (DE-627)359787258 (DE-600)2098375-X 1619-7089 nnns volume:32 year:2004 number:3 day:15 month:10 pages:294-301 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 32 2004 3 15 10 294-301 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1 doi (DE-627)SPR003118622 (SPR)s00259-004-1566-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Krak, Nanda C. verfasserin aut Effects of ROI definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial 2004 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag 2004 Purpose Quantitative measurement of tracer uptake in a tumour can be influenced by a number of factors, including the method of defining regions of interest (ROIs) and the reconstruction parameters used. The main purpose of this study was to determine the effects of different ROI methods on quantitative outcome, using two reconstruction methods and the standard uptake value (SUV) as a simple quantitative measure of FDG uptake. Methods Four commonly used methods of ROI definition (manual placement, fixed dimensions, threshold based and maximum pixel value) were used to calculate SUV ($ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $, $ SUV_{75} $ and $ SUV_{max} $, respectively) and to generate “metabolic” tumour volumes. Test–retest reproducibility of SUVs and of “metabolic” tumour volumes and the applicability of ROI methods during chemotherapy were assessed. In addition, SUVs calculated on ordered subsets expectation maximisation (OSEM) and filtered back-projection (FBP) images were compared. Results ROI definition had a direct effect on quantitative outcome. On average, $ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $ and $ SUV_{75} $, were respectively 48%, 27%, 34% and 15% lower than $ SUV_{max} $ when calculated on OSEM images. No statistically significant differences were found between SUVs calculated on OSEM and FBP reconstructed images. Highest reproducibility was found for $ SUV_{15 mm} $ and $ SUV_{[MAN]} $ (ICC 0.95 and 0.94, respectively) and for “metabolic” volumes measured with the manual and 50% threshold ROIs (ICC 0.99 for both). Manual, 75% threshold and maximum pixel ROIs could be used throughout therapy, regardless of changes in tumour uptake or geometry. SUVs showed the same trend in relative change in FDG uptake after chemotherapy, irrespective of the ROI method used. Conclusion The method of ROI definition has a direct influence on quantitative outcome. In terms of simplicity, user-independence, reproducibility and general applicability the threshold-based and fixed dimension methods are the best ROI methods. Threshold methods are in addition relatively independent of changes in size and geometry, however, and may therefore be more suitable for response monitoring purposes. Standard Uptake Value (dpeaa)DE-He213 Partial Volume Effect (dpeaa)DE-He213 Order Subset Expectation Maximisation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Threshold Method (dpeaa)DE-He213 Maximum Pixel (dpeaa)DE-He213 Boellaard, R. aut Hoekstra, Otto S. aut Twisk, Jos W. R. aut Hoekstra, Corneline J. aut Lammertsma, Adriaan A. aut Enthalten in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging Heidelberg [u.a.] : Springer-Verl., 2002 32(2004), 3 vom: 15. Okt., Seite 294-301 (DE-627)359787258 (DE-600)2098375-X 1619-7089 nnns volume:32 year:2004 number:3 day:15 month:10 pages:294-301 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 32 2004 3 15 10 294-301 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1 doi (DE-627)SPR003118622 (SPR)s00259-004-1566-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Krak, Nanda C. verfasserin aut Effects of ROI definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial 2004 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag 2004 Purpose Quantitative measurement of tracer uptake in a tumour can be influenced by a number of factors, including the method of defining regions of interest (ROIs) and the reconstruction parameters used. The main purpose of this study was to determine the effects of different ROI methods on quantitative outcome, using two reconstruction methods and the standard uptake value (SUV) as a simple quantitative measure of FDG uptake. Methods Four commonly used methods of ROI definition (manual placement, fixed dimensions, threshold based and maximum pixel value) were used to calculate SUV ($ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $, $ SUV_{75} $ and $ SUV_{max} $, respectively) and to generate “metabolic” tumour volumes. Test–retest reproducibility of SUVs and of “metabolic” tumour volumes and the applicability of ROI methods during chemotherapy were assessed. In addition, SUVs calculated on ordered subsets expectation maximisation (OSEM) and filtered back-projection (FBP) images were compared. Results ROI definition had a direct effect on quantitative outcome. On average, $ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $ and $ SUV_{75} $, were respectively 48%, 27%, 34% and 15% lower than $ SUV_{max} $ when calculated on OSEM images. No statistically significant differences were found between SUVs calculated on OSEM and FBP reconstructed images. Highest reproducibility was found for $ SUV_{15 mm} $ and $ SUV_{[MAN]} $ (ICC 0.95 and 0.94, respectively) and for “metabolic” volumes measured with the manual and 50% threshold ROIs (ICC 0.99 for both). Manual, 75% threshold and maximum pixel ROIs could be used throughout therapy, regardless of changes in tumour uptake or geometry. SUVs showed the same trend in relative change in FDG uptake after chemotherapy, irrespective of the ROI method used. Conclusion The method of ROI definition has a direct influence on quantitative outcome. In terms of simplicity, user-independence, reproducibility and general applicability the threshold-based and fixed dimension methods are the best ROI methods. Threshold methods are in addition relatively independent of changes in size and geometry, however, and may therefore be more suitable for response monitoring purposes. Standard Uptake Value (dpeaa)DE-He213 Partial Volume Effect (dpeaa)DE-He213 Order Subset Expectation Maximisation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Threshold Method (dpeaa)DE-He213 Maximum Pixel (dpeaa)DE-He213 Boellaard, R. aut Hoekstra, Otto S. aut Twisk, Jos W. R. aut Hoekstra, Corneline J. aut Lammertsma, Adriaan A. aut Enthalten in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging Heidelberg [u.a.] : Springer-Verl., 2002 32(2004), 3 vom: 15. Okt., Seite 294-301 (DE-627)359787258 (DE-600)2098375-X 1619-7089 nnns volume:32 year:2004 number:3 day:15 month:10 pages:294-301 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 32 2004 3 15 10 294-301 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1 doi (DE-627)SPR003118622 (SPR)s00259-004-1566-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Krak, Nanda C. verfasserin aut Effects of ROI definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial 2004 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag 2004 Purpose Quantitative measurement of tracer uptake in a tumour can be influenced by a number of factors, including the method of defining regions of interest (ROIs) and the reconstruction parameters used. The main purpose of this study was to determine the effects of different ROI methods on quantitative outcome, using two reconstruction methods and the standard uptake value (SUV) as a simple quantitative measure of FDG uptake. Methods Four commonly used methods of ROI definition (manual placement, fixed dimensions, threshold based and maximum pixel value) were used to calculate SUV ($ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $, $ SUV_{75} $ and $ SUV_{max} $, respectively) and to generate “metabolic” tumour volumes. Test–retest reproducibility of SUVs and of “metabolic” tumour volumes and the applicability of ROI methods during chemotherapy were assessed. In addition, SUVs calculated on ordered subsets expectation maximisation (OSEM) and filtered back-projection (FBP) images were compared. Results ROI definition had a direct effect on quantitative outcome. On average, $ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $ and $ SUV_{75} $, were respectively 48%, 27%, 34% and 15% lower than $ SUV_{max} $ when calculated on OSEM images. No statistically significant differences were found between SUVs calculated on OSEM and FBP reconstructed images. Highest reproducibility was found for $ SUV_{15 mm} $ and $ SUV_{[MAN]} $ (ICC 0.95 and 0.94, respectively) and for “metabolic” volumes measured with the manual and 50% threshold ROIs (ICC 0.99 for both). Manual, 75% threshold and maximum pixel ROIs could be used throughout therapy, regardless of changes in tumour uptake or geometry. SUVs showed the same trend in relative change in FDG uptake after chemotherapy, irrespective of the ROI method used. Conclusion The method of ROI definition has a direct influence on quantitative outcome. In terms of simplicity, user-independence, reproducibility and general applicability the threshold-based and fixed dimension methods are the best ROI methods. Threshold methods are in addition relatively independent of changes in size and geometry, however, and may therefore be more suitable for response monitoring purposes. Standard Uptake Value (dpeaa)DE-He213 Partial Volume Effect (dpeaa)DE-He213 Order Subset Expectation Maximisation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Threshold Method (dpeaa)DE-He213 Maximum Pixel (dpeaa)DE-He213 Boellaard, R. aut Hoekstra, Otto S. aut Twisk, Jos W. R. aut Hoekstra, Corneline J. aut Lammertsma, Adriaan A. aut Enthalten in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging Heidelberg [u.a.] : Springer-Verl., 2002 32(2004), 3 vom: 15. Okt., Seite 294-301 (DE-627)359787258 (DE-600)2098375-X 1619-7089 nnns volume:32 year:2004 number:3 day:15 month:10 pages:294-301 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 32 2004 3 15 10 294-301 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 32(2004), 3 vom: 15. Okt., Seite 294-301 volume:32 year:2004 number:3 day:15 month:10 pages:294-301 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 32(2004), 3 vom: 15. Okt., Seite 294-301 volume:32 year:2004 number:3 day:15 month:10 pages:294-301 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Standard Uptake Value Partial Volume Effect Order Subset Expectation Maximisation Threshold Method Maximum Pixel |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Krak, Nanda C. @@aut@@ Boellaard, R. @@aut@@ Hoekstra, Otto S. @@aut@@ Twisk, Jos W. R. @@aut@@ Hoekstra, Corneline J. @@aut@@ Lammertsma, Adriaan A. @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2004-10-15T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
359787258 |
| id |
SPR003118622 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR003118622</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519162345.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201001s2004 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR003118622</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s00259-004-1566-1-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Krak, Nanda C.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Effects of ROI definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Springer-Verlag 2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Purpose Quantitative measurement of tracer uptake in a tumour can be influenced by a number of factors, including the method of defining regions of interest (ROIs) and the reconstruction parameters used. The main purpose of this study was to determine the effects of different ROI methods on quantitative outcome, using two reconstruction methods and the standard uptake value (SUV) as a simple quantitative measure of FDG uptake. Methods Four commonly used methods of ROI definition (manual placement, fixed dimensions, threshold based and maximum pixel value) were used to calculate SUV ($ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $, $ SUV_{75} $ and $ SUV_{max} $, respectively) and to generate “metabolic” tumour volumes. Test–retest reproducibility of SUVs and of “metabolic” tumour volumes and the applicability of ROI methods during chemotherapy were assessed. In addition, SUVs calculated on ordered subsets expectation maximisation (OSEM) and filtered back-projection (FBP) images were compared. Results ROI definition had a direct effect on quantitative outcome. On average, $ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $ and $ SUV_{75} $, were respectively 48%, 27%, 34% and 15% lower than $ SUV_{max} $ when calculated on OSEM images. No statistically significant differences were found between SUVs calculated on OSEM and FBP reconstructed images. Highest reproducibility was found for $ SUV_{15 mm} $ and $ SUV_{[MAN]} $ (ICC 0.95 and 0.94, respectively) and for “metabolic” volumes measured with the manual and 50% threshold ROIs (ICC 0.99 for both). Manual, 75% threshold and maximum pixel ROIs could be used throughout therapy, regardless of changes in tumour uptake or geometry. SUVs showed the same trend in relative change in FDG uptake after chemotherapy, irrespective of the ROI method used. Conclusion The method of ROI definition has a direct influence on quantitative outcome. In terms of simplicity, user-independence, reproducibility and general applicability the threshold-based and fixed dimension methods are the best ROI methods. Threshold methods are in addition relatively independent of changes in size and geometry, however, and may therefore be more suitable for response monitoring purposes.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Standard Uptake Value</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Partial Volume Effect</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Order Subset Expectation Maximisation</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Threshold Method</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Maximum Pixel</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Boellaard, R.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hoekstra, Otto S.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Twisk, Jos W. R.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hoekstra, Corneline J.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lammertsma, Adriaan A.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging</subfield><subfield code="d">Heidelberg [u.a.] : Springer-Verl., 2002</subfield><subfield code="g">32(2004), 3 vom: 15. Okt., Seite 294-301</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)359787258</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2098375-X</subfield><subfield code="x">1619-7089</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:32</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2004</subfield><subfield code="g">number:3</subfield><subfield code="g">day:15</subfield><subfield code="g">month:10</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:294-301</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_120</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_138</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_171</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_250</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_281</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_636</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2031</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2039</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2057</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2070</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2086</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2093</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2107</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2116</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2119</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2144</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2188</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2446</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2548</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4328</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">32</subfield><subfield code="j">2004</subfield><subfield code="e">3</subfield><subfield code="b">15</subfield><subfield code="c">10</subfield><subfield code="h">294-301</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Krak, Nanda C. |
| spellingShingle |
Krak, Nanda C. misc Standard Uptake Value misc Partial Volume Effect misc Order Subset Expectation Maximisation misc Threshold Method misc Maximum Pixel Effects of ROI definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial |
| authorStr |
Krak, Nanda C. |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)359787258 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut aut |
| collection |
springer |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1619-7089 |
| topic_title |
Effects of ROI definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial Standard Uptake Value (dpeaa)DE-He213 Partial Volume Effect (dpeaa)DE-He213 Order Subset Expectation Maximisation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Threshold Method (dpeaa)DE-He213 Maximum Pixel (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
| topic |
misc Standard Uptake Value misc Partial Volume Effect misc Order Subset Expectation Maximisation misc Threshold Method misc Maximum Pixel |
| topic_unstemmed |
misc Standard Uptake Value misc Partial Volume Effect misc Order Subset Expectation Maximisation misc Threshold Method misc Maximum Pixel |
| topic_browse |
misc Standard Uptake Value misc Partial Volume Effect misc Order Subset Expectation Maximisation misc Threshold Method misc Maximum Pixel |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
359787258 |
| hierarchy_top_title |
European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)359787258 (DE-600)2098375-X |
| title |
Effects of ROI definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR003118622 (SPR)s00259-004-1566-1-e |
| title_full |
Effects of ROI definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial |
| author_sort |
Krak, Nanda C. |
| journal |
European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging |
| journalStr |
European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2004 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
294 |
| author_browse |
Krak, Nanda C. Boellaard, R. Hoekstra, Otto S. Twisk, Jos W. R. Hoekstra, Corneline J. Lammertsma, Adriaan A. |
| container_volume |
32 |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Krak, Nanda C. |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1 |
| title_sort |
effects of roi definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial |
| title_auth |
Effects of ROI definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial |
| abstract |
Purpose Quantitative measurement of tracer uptake in a tumour can be influenced by a number of factors, including the method of defining regions of interest (ROIs) and the reconstruction parameters used. The main purpose of this study was to determine the effects of different ROI methods on quantitative outcome, using two reconstruction methods and the standard uptake value (SUV) as a simple quantitative measure of FDG uptake. Methods Four commonly used methods of ROI definition (manual placement, fixed dimensions, threshold based and maximum pixel value) were used to calculate SUV ($ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $, $ SUV_{75} $ and $ SUV_{max} $, respectively) and to generate “metabolic” tumour volumes. Test–retest reproducibility of SUVs and of “metabolic” tumour volumes and the applicability of ROI methods during chemotherapy were assessed. In addition, SUVs calculated on ordered subsets expectation maximisation (OSEM) and filtered back-projection (FBP) images were compared. Results ROI definition had a direct effect on quantitative outcome. On average, $ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $ and $ SUV_{75} $, were respectively 48%, 27%, 34% and 15% lower than $ SUV_{max} $ when calculated on OSEM images. No statistically significant differences were found between SUVs calculated on OSEM and FBP reconstructed images. Highest reproducibility was found for $ SUV_{15 mm} $ and $ SUV_{[MAN]} $ (ICC 0.95 and 0.94, respectively) and for “metabolic” volumes measured with the manual and 50% threshold ROIs (ICC 0.99 for both). Manual, 75% threshold and maximum pixel ROIs could be used throughout therapy, regardless of changes in tumour uptake or geometry. SUVs showed the same trend in relative change in FDG uptake after chemotherapy, irrespective of the ROI method used. Conclusion The method of ROI definition has a direct influence on quantitative outcome. In terms of simplicity, user-independence, reproducibility and general applicability the threshold-based and fixed dimension methods are the best ROI methods. Threshold methods are in addition relatively independent of changes in size and geometry, however, and may therefore be more suitable for response monitoring purposes. © Springer-Verlag 2004 |
| abstractGer |
Purpose Quantitative measurement of tracer uptake in a tumour can be influenced by a number of factors, including the method of defining regions of interest (ROIs) and the reconstruction parameters used. The main purpose of this study was to determine the effects of different ROI methods on quantitative outcome, using two reconstruction methods and the standard uptake value (SUV) as a simple quantitative measure of FDG uptake. Methods Four commonly used methods of ROI definition (manual placement, fixed dimensions, threshold based and maximum pixel value) were used to calculate SUV ($ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $, $ SUV_{75} $ and $ SUV_{max} $, respectively) and to generate “metabolic” tumour volumes. Test–retest reproducibility of SUVs and of “metabolic” tumour volumes and the applicability of ROI methods during chemotherapy were assessed. In addition, SUVs calculated on ordered subsets expectation maximisation (OSEM) and filtered back-projection (FBP) images were compared. Results ROI definition had a direct effect on quantitative outcome. On average, $ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $ and $ SUV_{75} $, were respectively 48%, 27%, 34% and 15% lower than $ SUV_{max} $ when calculated on OSEM images. No statistically significant differences were found between SUVs calculated on OSEM and FBP reconstructed images. Highest reproducibility was found for $ SUV_{15 mm} $ and $ SUV_{[MAN]} $ (ICC 0.95 and 0.94, respectively) and for “metabolic” volumes measured with the manual and 50% threshold ROIs (ICC 0.99 for both). Manual, 75% threshold and maximum pixel ROIs could be used throughout therapy, regardless of changes in tumour uptake or geometry. SUVs showed the same trend in relative change in FDG uptake after chemotherapy, irrespective of the ROI method used. Conclusion The method of ROI definition has a direct influence on quantitative outcome. In terms of simplicity, user-independence, reproducibility and general applicability the threshold-based and fixed dimension methods are the best ROI methods. Threshold methods are in addition relatively independent of changes in size and geometry, however, and may therefore be more suitable for response monitoring purposes. © Springer-Verlag 2004 |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Purpose Quantitative measurement of tracer uptake in a tumour can be influenced by a number of factors, including the method of defining regions of interest (ROIs) and the reconstruction parameters used. The main purpose of this study was to determine the effects of different ROI methods on quantitative outcome, using two reconstruction methods and the standard uptake value (SUV) as a simple quantitative measure of FDG uptake. Methods Four commonly used methods of ROI definition (manual placement, fixed dimensions, threshold based and maximum pixel value) were used to calculate SUV ($ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $, $ SUV_{75} $ and $ SUV_{max} $, respectively) and to generate “metabolic” tumour volumes. Test–retest reproducibility of SUVs and of “metabolic” tumour volumes and the applicability of ROI methods during chemotherapy were assessed. In addition, SUVs calculated on ordered subsets expectation maximisation (OSEM) and filtered back-projection (FBP) images were compared. Results ROI definition had a direct effect on quantitative outcome. On average, $ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $ and $ SUV_{75} $, were respectively 48%, 27%, 34% and 15% lower than $ SUV_{max} $ when calculated on OSEM images. No statistically significant differences were found between SUVs calculated on OSEM and FBP reconstructed images. Highest reproducibility was found for $ SUV_{15 mm} $ and $ SUV_{[MAN]} $ (ICC 0.95 and 0.94, respectively) and for “metabolic” volumes measured with the manual and 50% threshold ROIs (ICC 0.99 for both). Manual, 75% threshold and maximum pixel ROIs could be used throughout therapy, regardless of changes in tumour uptake or geometry. SUVs showed the same trend in relative change in FDG uptake after chemotherapy, irrespective of the ROI method used. Conclusion The method of ROI definition has a direct influence on quantitative outcome. In terms of simplicity, user-independence, reproducibility and general applicability the threshold-based and fixed dimension methods are the best ROI methods. Threshold methods are in addition relatively independent of changes in size and geometry, however, and may therefore be more suitable for response monitoring purposes. © Springer-Verlag 2004 |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 |
| container_issue |
3 |
| title_short |
Effects of ROI definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial |
| url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Boellaard, R. Hoekstra, Otto S. Twisk, Jos W. R. Hoekstra, Corneline J. Lammertsma, Adriaan A. |
| author2Str |
Boellaard, R. Hoekstra, Otto S. Twisk, Jos W. R. Hoekstra, Corneline J. Lammertsma, Adriaan A. |
| ppnlink |
359787258 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
c |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1 |
| up_date |
2024-07-03T17:25:10.064Z |
| _version_ |
1803579566414888961 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR003118622</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519162345.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201001s2004 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR003118622</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s00259-004-1566-1-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Krak, Nanda C.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Effects of ROI definition and reconstruction method on quantitative outcome and applicability in a response monitoring trial</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Springer-Verlag 2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Purpose Quantitative measurement of tracer uptake in a tumour can be influenced by a number of factors, including the method of defining regions of interest (ROIs) and the reconstruction parameters used. The main purpose of this study was to determine the effects of different ROI methods on quantitative outcome, using two reconstruction methods and the standard uptake value (SUV) as a simple quantitative measure of FDG uptake. Methods Four commonly used methods of ROI definition (manual placement, fixed dimensions, threshold based and maximum pixel value) were used to calculate SUV ($ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $, $ SUV_{75} $ and $ SUV_{max} $, respectively) and to generate “metabolic” tumour volumes. Test–retest reproducibility of SUVs and of “metabolic” tumour volumes and the applicability of ROI methods during chemotherapy were assessed. In addition, SUVs calculated on ordered subsets expectation maximisation (OSEM) and filtered back-projection (FBP) images were compared. Results ROI definition had a direct effect on quantitative outcome. On average, $ SUV_{[MAN]} $, $ SUV_{15 mm} $, $ SUV_{50} $ and $ SUV_{75} $, were respectively 48%, 27%, 34% and 15% lower than $ SUV_{max} $ when calculated on OSEM images. No statistically significant differences were found between SUVs calculated on OSEM and FBP reconstructed images. Highest reproducibility was found for $ SUV_{15 mm} $ and $ SUV_{[MAN]} $ (ICC 0.95 and 0.94, respectively) and for “metabolic” volumes measured with the manual and 50% threshold ROIs (ICC 0.99 for both). Manual, 75% threshold and maximum pixel ROIs could be used throughout therapy, regardless of changes in tumour uptake or geometry. SUVs showed the same trend in relative change in FDG uptake after chemotherapy, irrespective of the ROI method used. Conclusion The method of ROI definition has a direct influence on quantitative outcome. In terms of simplicity, user-independence, reproducibility and general applicability the threshold-based and fixed dimension methods are the best ROI methods. Threshold methods are in addition relatively independent of changes in size and geometry, however, and may therefore be more suitable for response monitoring purposes.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Standard Uptake Value</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Partial Volume Effect</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Order Subset Expectation Maximisation</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Threshold Method</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Maximum Pixel</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Boellaard, R.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hoekstra, Otto S.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Twisk, Jos W. R.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hoekstra, Corneline J.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lammertsma, Adriaan A.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging</subfield><subfield code="d">Heidelberg [u.a.] : Springer-Verl., 2002</subfield><subfield code="g">32(2004), 3 vom: 15. Okt., Seite 294-301</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)359787258</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2098375-X</subfield><subfield code="x">1619-7089</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:32</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2004</subfield><subfield code="g">number:3</subfield><subfield code="g">day:15</subfield><subfield code="g">month:10</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:294-301</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-004-1566-1</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_120</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_138</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_171</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_250</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_281</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_636</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2031</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2039</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2057</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2070</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2086</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2093</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2107</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2116</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2119</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2144</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2188</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2446</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2548</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4328</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">32</subfield><subfield code="j">2004</subfield><subfield code="e">3</subfield><subfield code="b">15</subfield><subfield code="c">10</subfield><subfield code="h">294-301</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.4000654 |