Does FDG-PET/MR offer a similar diagnostic performance to FDG-PET/CT, and therefore, offer a comparable whole-body staging examination in patients diagnosed with non-Hodgkin's and Hodgkin's lymphoma?
|dc.contributor.author||Atkinson, Wendy Laura||en_US|
|dc.description||Thesis (M.A.)--Boston University||en_US|
|dc.description.abstract||Purpose: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of simultaneous FDG-PET/MR compared to FDG-PET/CT in non-Hodgkin’s and Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Methods: This cross-sectional study included fifteen patients with a confirmed diagnosis of NHL or HL who had completed a clinical FDG-PET/CT and a same day research FDG-PET/MR. SUVmax for FDG-avid lesions were measured for each imaging modality, as well as ADC from FDG-PET/MR. Strength of correlation between variables was measured using the Spearman rank correlation coefficient (rs). The overall radiation exposure dose was also calculated for a clinical FDG-PET/CT and compared to the radiation dose level remaining at time of FDG-PET/MR. Results: Thirty-seven concordant FDG-avid lesions were identified on both PET/CT and PET/MR imaging. SUVmax from FDG-PET/MR versus FDG-PET/CT demonstrated a strongly positive correlation (rs=0.84 (0.71, 0.92); p<0.0001). There was no correlation found between ADCmin and SUVmax from FDG- PET/MR (r=0.35(-0.07, 0.66); p=0.09). The overall radiation exposure from one FDG-PET/CT was 24.07±6.06mSv (range: 17.67-33.84mSv) compared to the decay-corrected radiation dose at FDG-PET/MR (2.87±0.92mSv (range: 1.86- 5.90mSv)). Conclusion: FDG-PET/MR offers a comparable whole body staging examination with an improved radiation safety profile in NHL and HL patients when based on the maximum standardized uptake value.||en_US|
|dc.title||Does FDG-PET/MR offer a similar diagnostic performance to FDG-PET/CT, and therefore, offer a comparable whole-body staging examination in patients diagnosed with non-Hodgkin's and Hodgkin's lymphoma?||en_US|
|etd.degree.name||Master of Arts||en_US|
This item appears in the following Collection(s)