open access

Vol 26 (2023): Continuous Publishing
Research paper
Submitted: 2022-04-16
Accepted: 2022-08-03
Published online: 2022-09-13
Get Citation

Standardized uptake value of normal organs on routine clinical [18F]FDG PET/CT: impact of tumor metabolism and patient-related factors

Punit Sharma1, Piyali Chatterjee2, Luis Andres Alvarado3, Alok Kumar Dwivedi3
·
Pubmed: 36286203
·
Nucl. Med. Rev 2023;26:1-10.
Affiliations
  1. Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET-CT, Apollo Multispeciality Hospital, Kolkata, India
  2. Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET-CT, AMRI Hospital, Kolkata, India
  3. Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, El Paso, Texas, USA

open access

Vol 26 (2023): Continuous Publishing
Original articles
Submitted: 2022-04-16
Accepted: 2022-08-03
Published online: 2022-09-13

Abstract

Background: To evaluate the effect of patient-related factors such as age, gender, body mass index (BMI), blood glucose (BG), diabetes, serum creatinine and injected dose on 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose ([18F]FDG) uptake of tumor and normal organs, as well impact of [18F]FDG uptake of tumor on normal organs, in clinical positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT).

Material and methods: In this retrospective study, data of 200 patients who underwent clinical [18F]FDG PET/CT with (n = 192) and without (n = 8) intravenous contrast was evaluated. Ten target organs and tumor [18F]FDG uptake were measured with a standardized uptake value maximum (SUVmax). Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated for continuous variables while t-test/Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to compare continuous outcomes. Multivariate linear regression analysis was done to exclude covariates, followed by posthoc multiple linear regression analysis after adjusting the levels of significance.

Results: Significant but weak positive correlation was seen between tumor [18F]FDG uptake with uptake in the pancreas (r = 0.43, p < 0.001) and heart (r = 0.19, p = 0.049), but not other organs. With age, a significant negative correlation was seen with the brain (r = –0.183, p = 0.009) and a positive correlation was seen with the blood pool (r = 0.205, p = 0.003). With BG, significant negative correlation was seen with the brain (r = –0.449, p < 0.0001) and heart (r = –0.15, p = 0.033), while a positive correlation was seen with fat (r = 0.143, p = 0.043). BMI showed a significant positive correlation with [18F]FDG uptake of all organs except the pancreas and heart, as well as tumor. No significant correlation was seen with serum creatinine and injected [18F]FDG dose. Significantly higher uptake was seen in the brain, spleen, and muscles of females. Between obese and non-obese, a significant difference was seen for all organs except for the pancreas and heart, and tumor. Comparison between non-diabetic and diabetic patients showed significant differences only for bone. Multivariate linear analysis adjusting for cofactors showed only BMI (p = 0.0009) and BG (p = 0.0002) to be independently correlated with [18F]FDG uptake. Post-hoc multiple regression analysis showed a significant positive correlation between [18F]FDG uptake of the brain (β = 0.118, p < 0.001), liver (β = 0.02, p = 0.002), and fat (β = 0.01, p < 0.0006) with BMI, and significant negative correlation of brain uptake with BG (β = 0.03, p < 0.0001).

Conclusions: Tumor [18F]FDG uptake has no significant effect on the uptake in organs, except for the pancreas and heart. Age, gender, BMI, and BG, but not creatinine and injected [18F]FDG dose show correlation with uptake in tumor and organs. BG and BMI are independent significant factors, with a positive correlation of BMI with the brain, hepatic and fat uptake, and a negative correlation of BG with brain uptake.

Abstract

Background: To evaluate the effect of patient-related factors such as age, gender, body mass index (BMI), blood glucose (BG), diabetes, serum creatinine and injected dose on 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose ([18F]FDG) uptake of tumor and normal organs, as well impact of [18F]FDG uptake of tumor on normal organs, in clinical positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT).

Material and methods: In this retrospective study, data of 200 patients who underwent clinical [18F]FDG PET/CT with (n = 192) and without (n = 8) intravenous contrast was evaluated. Ten target organs and tumor [18F]FDG uptake were measured with a standardized uptake value maximum (SUVmax). Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated for continuous variables while t-test/Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to compare continuous outcomes. Multivariate linear regression analysis was done to exclude covariates, followed by posthoc multiple linear regression analysis after adjusting the levels of significance.

Results: Significant but weak positive correlation was seen between tumor [18F]FDG uptake with uptake in the pancreas (r = 0.43, p < 0.001) and heart (r = 0.19, p = 0.049), but not other organs. With age, a significant negative correlation was seen with the brain (r = –0.183, p = 0.009) and a positive correlation was seen with the blood pool (r = 0.205, p = 0.003). With BG, significant negative correlation was seen with the brain (r = –0.449, p < 0.0001) and heart (r = –0.15, p = 0.033), while a positive correlation was seen with fat (r = 0.143, p = 0.043). BMI showed a significant positive correlation with [18F]FDG uptake of all organs except the pancreas and heart, as well as tumor. No significant correlation was seen with serum creatinine and injected [18F]FDG dose. Significantly higher uptake was seen in the brain, spleen, and muscles of females. Between obese and non-obese, a significant difference was seen for all organs except for the pancreas and heart, and tumor. Comparison between non-diabetic and diabetic patients showed significant differences only for bone. Multivariate linear analysis adjusting for cofactors showed only BMI (p = 0.0009) and BG (p = 0.0002) to be independently correlated with [18F]FDG uptake. Post-hoc multiple regression analysis showed a significant positive correlation between [18F]FDG uptake of the brain (β = 0.118, p < 0.001), liver (β = 0.02, p = 0.002), and fat (β = 0.01, p < 0.0006) with BMI, and significant negative correlation of brain uptake with BG (β = 0.03, p < 0.0001).

Conclusions: Tumor [18F]FDG uptake has no significant effect on the uptake in organs, except for the pancreas and heart. Age, gender, BMI, and BG, but not creatinine and injected [18F]FDG dose show correlation with uptake in tumor and organs. BG and BMI are independent significant factors, with a positive correlation of BMI with the brain, hepatic and fat uptake, and a negative correlation of BG with brain uptake.

Get Citation

Keywords

[18F]FDG; PET/CT; SUV; normal uptake; tumor

About this article
Title

Standardized uptake value of normal organs on routine clinical [18F]FDG PET/CT: impact of tumor metabolism and patient-related factors

Journal

Nuclear Medicine Review

Issue

Vol 26 (2023): Continuous Publishing

Article type

Research paper

Pages

1-10

Published online

2022-09-13

Page views

3074

Article views/downloads

809

DOI

10.5603/NMR.a2022.0036

Pubmed

36286203

Bibliographic record

Nucl. Med. Rev 2023;26:1-10.

Keywords

[18F]FDG
PET/CT
SUV
normal uptake
tumor

Authors

Punit Sharma
Piyali Chatterjee
Luis Andres Alvarado
Alok Kumar Dwivedi

References (26)
  1. Pauwels EK, Ribeiro MJ, Stoot JH, et al. FDG accumulation and tumor biology. Nucl Med Biol. 1998; 25(4): 317–322.
  2. Sollini M, Bandera F, Kirienko M. Quantitative imaging biomarkers in nuclear medicine: from SUV to image mining studies. Highlights from annals of nuclear medicine 2018. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2019; 46(13): 2737–2745.
  3. Bakhshi S, Bhethanabhotla S, Kumar R, et al. Posttreatment PET/CT rather than interim PET/CT using deauville criteria predicts outcome in pediatric hodgkin lymphoma: a prospective study comparing PET/CT with conventional imaging. J Nucl Med. 2017; 58(4): 577–583.
  4. Marcus C, Ciarallo A, Tahari AK, et al. Head and neck PET/CT: therapy response interpretation criteria (Hopkins Criteria)-interreader reliability, accuracy, and survival outcomes. J Nucl Med. 2014; 55(9): 1411–1416.
  5. Lodge MA. Repeatability of SUV in Oncologic F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 2017; 58(4): 523–532.
  6. Chen YC, Wang QQ, Wang YH, et al. Intravenous regular insulin is an efficient and safe procedure for obtaining high-quality cardiac F-FDG PET images: an open-label, single-center, randomized controlled prospective trial. J Nucl Cardiol. 2022; 29(1): 239–247.
  7. Sprinz C, Altmayer S, Zanon M, et al. Effects of blood glucose level on 18F-FDG uptake for PET/CT in normal organs: A systematic review. PLoS One. 2018; 13(2): e0193140.
  8. Büsing KA, Schönberg SO, Brade J, et al. Impact of blood glucose, diabetes, insulin, and obesity on standardized uptake values in tumors and healthy organs on 18F-FDG PET/CT. Nucl Med Biol. 2013; 40(2): 206–213.
  9. Minamimoto R, Takahashi N, Inoue T. FDG-PET of patients with suspected renal failure: standardized uptake values in normal tissues. Ann Nucl Med. 2007; 21(4): 217–222.
  10. Boellaard R, Delgado-Bolton R, Oyen WJG, et al. FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015; 42(2): 328–354.
  11. de Groot EH, Post N, Boellaard R, et al. Optimized dose regimen for whole-body FDG-PET imaging. EJNMMI Res. 2013; 3(1): 63.
  12. Santra A, Kumar R, Sharma P, et al. F-18 FDG PET-CT for predicting survival in patients with recurrent glioma: a prospective study. Neuroradiology. 2011; 53(12): 1017–1024.
  13. Pourhassan Shamchi S, Khosravi M, Taghvaei R, et al. Normal patterns of regional brain F-FDG uptake in normal aging. Hell J Nucl Med. 2018; 21(3): 175–180.
  14. Bural GG, Torigian DA, Chamroonrat W, et al. FDG-PET is an effective imaging modality to detect and quantify age-related atherosclerosis in large arteries. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008; 35(3): 562–569.
  15. Slieker LJ, Sundell KL, Heath WF, et al. Glucose transporter levels in tissues of spontaneously diabetic Zucker fa/fa rat (ZDF/drt) and viable yellow mouse (Avy/a). Diabetes. 1992; 41(2): 187–193.
  16. Kaneta T, Hakamatsuka T, Takanami K, et al. Evaluation of the relationship between physiological FDG uptake in the heart and age, blood glucose level, fasting period, and hospitalization. Ann Nucl Med. 2006; 20(3): 203–208.
  17. Israel O, Weiler-Sagie M, Rispler S, et al. PET/CT quantitation of the effect of patient-related factors on cardiac 18F-FDG uptake. J Nucl Med. 2007; 48(2): 234–239.
  18. Rosen ED, Spiegelman BM. Adipocytes as regulators of energy balance and glucose homeostasis. Nature. 2006; 444(7121): 847–853.
  19. Pahk K, Kim EJu, Lee YJ, et al. Characterization of glucose uptake metabolism in visceral fat by 18 F-FDG PET/CT reflects inflammatory status in metabolic syndrome. PLoS One. 2020; 15(2): e0228602.
  20. Sarikaya I, Albatineh AN, Sarikaya A. Revisiting weight-normalized SUV and lean-body-mass-normalized SUV in PET studies. J Nucl Med Technol. 2020; 48(2): 163–167.
  21. Tahari AK, Chien D, Azadi JR, et al. Optimum lean body formulation for correction of standardized uptake value in PET imaging. J Nucl Med. 2014; 55(9): 1481–1484.
  22. Blaak E. Sex differences in the control of glucose homeostasis. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2008; 11(4): 500–504.
  23. Deurenberg P, Weststrate JA, Seidell JC. Body mass index as a measure of body fatness: age- and sex-specific prediction formulas. Br J Nutr. 1991; 65(2): 105–114.
  24. Klein SL, Flanagan KL. Sex differences in immune responses. Nat Rev Immunol. 2016; 16(10): 626–638.
  25. Zhao S, Kuge Y, Tsukamoto E, et al. Effects of insulin and glucose loading on FDG uptake in experimental malignant tumours and inflammatory lesions. Eur J Nucl Med. 2001; 28(6): 730–735.
  26. Shepherd PR, Kahn BB. Glucose transporters and insulin action--implications for insulin resistance and diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1999; 341(4): 248–257.

Regulations

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By VM Media Group sp. z o.o., Świętokrzyska 73 street, 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland

phone: +48 58 320 94 94, fax: +48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl