Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 9, 2025

PET and MRI Guided Irradiation of a Glioblastoma Rat Model Using a Micro-irradiator
Published on: December 28, 2017
Surrogating tumour cell density in head and neck cancer: [18F]FDG PET- versus ADC (MRI)-based approaches
Athanasios Kafkaletos1, Ilias Sachpazidis2, Michael Mix3
1Division of Medical Physics, Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Centre - University of Freiburg, Medical Faculty - University of Freiburg, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site DKTK-Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany. athanasios.kafkaletos@uniklinik-freiburg.de.
Objective:
In this study we examined the correlation between standardized uptake value (SUV) of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) within the gross tumor volume (GTV) of patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). In addition, we assessed the comparability of cell density (ρ) estimates obtained from FDG PET and MRI data.
Methods:
Twenty-one HNSCC patients from a prospective FMISO imaging trial underwent pre-treatment PET/CT and MRI. We assessed correlations between FDG SUV (mean, max) and ADC (mean, min) within the GTV using Pearson's correlation coefficient. The tumor cell density within the GTV was calculated from FDG SUV and from ADC maps. For the estimation of ADC-based cell density, we used a published tumor cell volume fraction (vTC). Agreement between FDG- and ADC-derived cell density estimates was assessed. The best-fitting vTC* was computed to achieve equal mean ρADC and ρFDG for each patient and was compared to the literature.
Results:
The SUV and ADC metrics showed up to moderate negative correlations, but none of them were statistically significant at p < 0.05. The correlation of SUVmean vs. ADCmean with Pearson's correlation coefficient r = -0.426 and p = 0.054 and SUVmax vs. ADCmin with r = -0.414 and p = 0.062 suggested a weak negative trend. The average and standard deviation of mean ρFDG and ρADC across our cohort were (1.8 ± 0.6) × 108 cells/ml and (3.3 ± 0.2) × 108 cells/ml. The difference between the mean ρFDG and ρADC was statistically significant (p < 0.001). To achieve equal mean ρADC and ρFDG for each patient, the mean optimal vTC* with standard deviation was 0.29 ± 0.09. Although significantly lower than the published mean vTC (0.54), vTC* lies within the published range of vTC for HNSCCs (0.28 to 0.75).
Conclusion:
ADC and SUV metrics exhibited moderate but marginally insignificant correlation in this dataset. Although not directly interchangeable, the two methods provide comparable, clinically relevant cell density estimates, offering flexibility to use the most accessible modality for individualized treatment planning.
Trial Registration:
Registered at German Clinical Trials Register on 20/08/2015 (DRKS00003830).
More Related Videos
10:28Gene Regulation and Targeted Therapy in Gastric Cancer Peritoneal Metastasis: Radiological Findings from Dual Energy CT and PET/CT
Published on: January 22, 2018
10:04Radionuclide-fluorescence Reporter Gene Imaging to Track Tumor Progression in Rodent Tumor Models
Published on: March 13, 2018
Related Concept Videos
Positron Emission Tomography
One of the main requirements of a PET scan is a positron-emitting radioisotope, which is produced in a cyclotron and then attached to a substance used by the part of the body...
Imaging Studies II: Positron Emission Tomography and Scintigraphy
Fundamental Principles of PET