↓ Skip to main content

Concordance of FDG PET/CT metabolic tumour volume versus DW-MRI functional tumour volume with T2-weighted anatomical tumour volume in cervical cancer

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Concordance of FDG PET/CT metabolic tumour volume versus DW-MRI functional tumour volume with T2-weighted anatomical tumour volume in cervical cancer
Published in
BMC Cancer, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12885-017-3800-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alta Y. T. Lai, Jose A. U. Perucho, Xiaopei Xu, Edward S. Hui, Elaine Y. P. Lee

Abstract

18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography with computed tomography (FDG PET/CT) has been employed to define radiotherapy targets using a threshold based on the standardised uptake value (SUV), and has been described for use in cervical cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the concordance between the metabolic tumour volume (MTV) measured on FDG PET/CT and the anatomical tumour volume (ATV) measured on T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (T2W-MRI); and compared with the functional tumour volume (FTV) measured on diffusion-weighted MRI (DW-MRI) in cervical cancer, taking the T2W-ATV as gold standard. Consecutive newly diagnosed cervical cancer patients who underwent FDG PET/CT and DW-MRI were retrospectively reviewed from June 2013 to July 2017. Volumes of interest was inserted to the focal hypermetabolic activity corresponding to the cervical tumour on FDG PET/CT with automated tumour contouring and manual adjustment, based on SUV 20%-80% thresholds of the maximum SUV (SUVmax) to define the MTV20-80, with intervals of 5%. Tumour areas were manually delineated on T2W-MRI and multiplied by slice thickness to calculate the ATV. FTV were derived by manually delineating tumour area on ADC map, multiplied by the slice thickness to determine the FTV(manual). Diffusion restricted areas was extracted from b0 and ADC map using K-means clustering to determine the FTV(semi-automated). The ATVs, FTVs and the MTVs at different thresholds were compared using the mean and correlated using Pearson's product-moment correlation. Twenty-nine patients were evaluated (median age 52 years). Paired difference of mean between ATV and MTV was the closest and not statistically significant at MTV30 (-2.9cm3, -5.2%, p = 0.301). This was less than the differences between ATV and FTV(semi-automated) (25.0cm3, 45.1%, p < 0.001) and FTV(manual) (11.2cm3, 20.1%, p = 0.001). The correlation of MTV30 with ATV was excellent (r = 0.968, p < 0.001) and better than that of the FTVs. Our study demonstrated that MTV30 was the only parameter investigated with no statistically significant difference with ATV, had the least absolute difference from ATV, and showed excellent positive correlation with ATV, suggesting its superiority as a functional imaging modality when compared with DW-MRI and supporting its use as a surrogate for ATV for radiotherapy tumour contouring.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Other 6 33%
Unknown 1 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 61%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Chemical Engineering 1 6%
Sports and Recreations 1 6%
Engineering 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 December 2017.
All research outputs
#10,870,585
of 12,265,937 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#3,646
of 4,502 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#284,850
of 343,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#216
of 294 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,265,937 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,502 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 343,671 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 294 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.