3’-Deoxy-3’-(18F) Fluorothymidine Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Treated With Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The primary objective was to compare 3'-deoxy-3'-( 18 F) fluorothymidine (FLT) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) uptake in 3 cohorts of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) patients: (1) pre-SBRT, (2) stable post-SBRT lung fibrosis, and (3) suspicious or proven local recurrence post-SBRT. The secondary objectives were to optimize FLT-PET imaging by comparing FLT uptake in respiratory-gated (4-dimensional) versus nongated (3-dimensional) FLT-PET scans. Methods Patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer planned or treated with SBRT at the institution with radiographic findings of fibrosis or recurrence were eligible for the study. All patients underwent imaging with FLT-PET/CT before SBRT in cohort 1 and at fibrosis or recurrence in cohort 2 and 3, respectively. The planned sample size was 20 patients in each cohort, with 60 patients total. FLT-PET standardized uptake value (SUV) variables including SUV max , SUV mean , SUV peak , SUV 50 , and SUV 95 were compared among the 3 cohorts using the Kruskal-Wallis test. The correlation of respiratory-gated and nongated FLT-PET SUV variables was performed using the Spearman correlation coefficient. Results Forty-one patients were recruited for the study (20 in cohort 1, 16 in cohort 2, and 5 in cohort 3) between 2015 and 2019. The majority received a diagnosis of stage I lung cancer (86%), and the most common prescription was 48 Gy in 4 fractions (59%). Respiratory-gated FLT-PET was performed in 35 patients. The FLT SUV variables were well correlated between respiratory-gated and nongated scans ( r = 0.8-1.0). The SUV peak , SUV mean , and SUV max were significantly lower in the fibrosis cohort compared with the recurrence and pretreatment cohorts. The SUV 50 and SUV 95 values in the recurrence cohort were statistically similar to the pretreatment cohort. Conclusions FLT-PET/CT may be helpful in differentiating SBRT-related fibrosis from recurrence. Nongated FLT-PET/CT with reporting of SUV max and SUV 95 values is recommended.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".