These joint practice guidelines, or procedure standards, were developed collaboratively by the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM), the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (SNMMI), the European Association of Neurooncology (EANO), and the working group for Response Assessment in Neurooncology with PET (PET-RANO). Brain PET imaging is being increasingly used to supplement MRI in the clinical management of glioma. The aim of these standards/guidelines is to assist nuclear medicine practitioners in recommending, performing, interpreting and reporting the results of brain PET imaging in patients with glioma to achieve a high-quality imaging standard for PET using FDG and the radiolabelled amino acids MET, FET and FDOPA. This will help promote the appropriate use of PET imaging and contribute to evidence-based medicine that may improve the diagnostic impact of this technique in neurooncological practice. The present document replaces a former version of the guidelines published in 2006 (Vander Borght et al. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 33:1374–80, 2006), and supplements a recent evidence-based recommendation by the PET-RANO working group and EANO on the clinical use of PET imaging in patients with glioma (Albert et al. Neuro Oncol. 18:1199–208, 2016). The information provided should be taken in the context of local conditions and regulations.

Quantitative positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) can be used as diagnostic or prognostic tools (i.e. single measurement) or for therapy monitoring (i.e. longitudinal studies) in multicentre studies. Use of quantitative parameters, such as standardized uptake values (SUVs), metabolic active tumor volumes (MATVs) or total lesion glycolysis (TLG), in a multicenter setting requires that these parameters be comparable among patients and sites, regardless of the PET/CT system used. This review describes the motivations and the methodologies for quantitative PET/CT performance harmonization with emphasis on the EANM Research Ltd. (EARL) Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET/CT accreditation program, one of the international harmonization programs aiming at using FDG PET as a quantitative imaging biomarker. In addition, future accreditation initiatives will be discussed. The validation of the EARL accreditation program to harmonize SUVs and MATVs is described in a wide range of tumor types, with focus on therapy assessment using either the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) criteria or PET Evaluation Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (PERCIST), as well as liver-based scales such as the Deauville score. Finally, also presented in this paper are the results from a survey across 51 EARL-accredited centers reporting how the program was implemented and its impact on daily routine and in clinical trials, harmonization of new metrics such as MATV and heterogeneity features.

A clinical adoption of integrated PET/MRI should entail the joint image display and interpretation of MR data, MR-based attenuation maps and uncorrected plus attenuation-corrected PET images in order to recognize potential pitfalls from MR-AC and to ensure clinically accurate image interpretation.

Use of PET/MR in children has not previously been reported, to the best of our knowledge. Children with systemic malignancies may benefit from the reduced radiation exposure offered by PET/MR. We report our initial experience with PET/MR hybrid imaging and our current established sequence protocol after 21 PET/MR studies in 15 children with multifocal malignant diseases. The effective dose of a PET/MR scan was only about 20% that of the equivalent PET/CT examination. Simultaneous acquisition of PET and MR data combines the advantages of the two previously separate modalities. Furthermore, the technique also enables whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and statements to be made about the biological cellularity and nuclear/cytoplasmic ratio of tumours. Combined PET/MR saves time and resources. One disadvantage of PET/MR is that in order to have an effect, a significantly longer examination time is needed than with PET/CT. In our initial experience, PET/MR has turned out to be an unexpectedly stable and reliable hybrid imaging modality, which generates a complementary diagnostic study of great additional value.

Significant differences of MRμMaps generated for the same subjects but different PET/MR systems resulted in differences in attenuation correction factors, particularly in the thorax. These differences currently limit the quantitative use of PET/MR in multi-center imaging studies.