Measurement repeatability of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT versus ¹⁸F-FDG PET/MRI in solid tumors of the pelvis

Knowledge of the within-subject variability of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/MRI measurements is necessary for proper interpretation of quantitative PET or MRI metrics in the context of therapeutic efficacy assessments with integrated PET/MRI scanners. The goal of this study was to determine the test–retest repeatability of these metrics on PET/ MRI, with comparison to similar metrics acquired by PET/CT. Methods: This prospective study enrolled subjects with pathology-proven pelvic malignancies. Baseline imaging consisted of PET/CT immediately followed by PET/MRI, using a single 370-MBq ¹⁸F-FDG dose. Repeat imaging was performed within 7 d using an identical imaging protocol, with no oncologic therapy between sessions. PET imaging on both scanners consisted of a list-mode acquisition at a single pelvic station. The MRI consisted of 2-point Dixon imaging for attenuation correction, standard sequences for anatomic correlation, and diffusion-weighted imaging. PET data were statically reconstructed using various frame durations and minimizing uptake time differences between sessions. SUV metrics were extracted for both PET/CT and PET/MRI in each imaging session. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) metrics were extracted for both PET/MRI sessions. Results: The study cohort consisted of 14 subjects (13 female, 1 male) with various pelvic cancers (11 cervical, 2 rectal, 1 endometrial). For SUV_max, the within-subject coefficient of variation (wCV) appeared higher for PET/CT (8.5%–12.8%) than PET/MRI (6.6%–8.7%) across all PET reconstructions, though with no significant repeatability differences (all P values $ 0.08) between modalities. For lean body mass-adjusted SUV_peak, the wCVs appeared similar for PET/CT (9.9%–11.5%) and PET/MRI (9.2%–11.3%) across all PET reconstructions, again with no significant repeatability differences (all P values $ 0.14) between modalities. For PET/MRI, the wCV for ADC_median of 3.5% appeared lower than the wCVs for SUV_max (6.6%–8.7%) and SUL_peak (9.2%–11.3%), though without significant repeatability differences (all P values $ 0.23). Conclusion: For solid tumors of the pelvis, the repeatability of the evaluated SUV and ADC metrics on ¹⁸F-FDG PET/MRI is both acceptably high and similar to previously published values for ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT and MRI, supporting the use of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/MRI for quantitative oncologic treatment response assessments.