Our purpose was to investigate differences between PET/MRI and PET/CT in lesion detection and classification in oncologic whole-body examinations and to investigate radiation exposure differences between the 2 modalities. Methods: In this observational single-center study, 1,003 oncologic examinations (918 patients; mean age, 57.8 ± 14.4 y) were included. Patients underwent PET/CT and subsequent PET/MRI (149.8 ± 49.7 min after tracer administration). Examinations were reviewed by radiologists and nuclear medicine physicians in consensus. Additional findings, characterization of indeterminate findings on PET/CT, and missed findings on PET/MRI, including their clinical relevance and effective dose of both modalities, were investigated. The McNemar test was used to compare lesion detection between the 2 hybrid imaging modalities (P , 0.001, indicating statistical significance). Results: Additional information on PET/ MRI was reported for 26.3% (264/1,003) of examinations, compared with PET/CT (P , 0.001). Of these, additional malignant findings were detected in 5.3% (53/1,003), leading to a change in TNM staging in 2.9% (29/1,003) due to PET/MRI. Definite lesion classification of indeterminate PET/CT findings was possible in 11.1% (111/1,003) with PET/MRI. In 2.9% (29/1,003), lesions detected on PET/CT were not visible on PET/MRI. Malignant lesions were missed in 1.2% (12/1,003) on PET/MRI, leading to a change in TNM staging in 0.5% (5/1,003). The estimated mean effective dose for whole-body PET/CT amounted to 17.6 ± 8.7 mSv, in comparison to 3.6 ± 1.4 mSv for PET/MRI, resulting in a potential dose reduction of 79.6% (P , 0.001). Conclusion: PET/MRI facilitates staging comparable to that of PET/CT and improves lesion detectability in selected cancers, potentially helping to promote fast, efficient local and whole-body staging in 1 step, when additional MRI is recommended. Furthermore, younger patients may benefit from the reduced radiation exposure of PET/MRI.

This paper proposes a novel test for simultaneous jumps in a bivariate Itô semimartingale when observation times are asynchronous and irregular. Inference is built on a realized correlation coefficient for the jumps of the two processes which is estimated using bivariate power variations of Hayashi-Yoshida type without an additional synchronization step. An associated central limit theorem is shown whose asymptotic distribution is assessed using a bootstrap procedure. Simulations show that the test works remarkably well in comparison with the much simpler case of regular observations.

The results demonstrate the necessity and superiority of a two-step F-FDG PET/MRI algorithm, comprising dedicated prone breast imaging and supine whole-body imaging, when compared to the one-step algorithm for local and whole-body staging in breast cancer patients.

No abstract

Objective: To evaluate the impact of different metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithms on Hounsfield unit (HU) and standardized uptake values (SUV) in a phantom setting and verify these results in patients with metallic implants undergoing oncological PET/CT examinations. Methods and materials: In this prospective study, PET-CT examinations of 28 oncological patients (14 female, 14 male, mean age 69.5 ± 15.2y) with 38 different metal implants were included. CT datasets were reconstructed using standard weighted filtered back projection (WFBP) without MAR, MAR in image space (MARIS) and iterative MAR (iMAR, hip algorithm). The three datasets were used for PET attenuation correction. SUV and HU measurements were performed at the site of the most prominent bright and dark band artifacts. Differences between HU and SUV values across the different reconstructions were compared using paired t-tests. Bonferroni correction was used to prevent alpha-error accumulation (p < 0.017). Results: For bright band artifacts, MARIS led to a non-significant mean decrease of 12.0% (345 ± 315 HU) in comparison with WFBP (391 ± 293 HU), whereas iMAR led to a significant decrease of 68.3% (125 ± 185 HU, p < 0.017). For SUVmean, MARIS showed no significant effect in comparison with WFBP (WFBP: 0.99 ± 0.40, MARIS: 0.96 ± 0.39), while iMAR led to a significant decrease of 11.1% (0.88 ± 0.35, p < 0.017). Similar results were observed for dark band artifacts. Conclusion: iMAR significantly reduces artifacts caused by metal implants in CT and thus leads to a significant change of SUV measurements in bright and dark band artifacts compared with WFBP and MARIS, thus probably improving PET quantification. Advances in knowledge: The present work indicates that MAR algorithms such as iMAR algorithm in integrated PET/CT scanners are useful to improve CT image quality as well as PET quantification in the evaluation of tracer uptake adjacent to large metal implants. A detailed analysis of oncological patients with various large metal implants using different MAR algorithms in PET/CT has not been conducted yet.