Physical Imaging Phantoms for Simulation of Tumor Heterogeneity in PET, CT, and MRI: An Overview of Existing Designs

Overview

Journal Med Phys

Specialty Biophysics

Date 2020 Jan 26

PMID 31981214

Citations 30

Authors

Alejandra Valladares

Thomas Beyer

Ivo Rausch

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: In oncology, lesion characterization is essential for tumor grading, treatment planning, and follow-up of cancer patients. Hybrid imaging systems, such as Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT)/CT, Positron Emission Tomography (PET)/CT, or PET/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), play an essential role for the noninvasive quantification of tumor characteristics. However, most of the existing approaches are challenged by intra- and intertumor heterogeneity. Novel quantitative imaging parameters that can be derived from textural feature analysis (as part of radiomics) are promising complements for improved characterization of tumor heterogeneity, thus, supporting clinically relevant implementations of personalized medicine concepts. Nevertheless, establishing new quantitative parameters for tumor characterization requires the use of standardized imaging objects to test the reliability of results prior to their implementation in patient studies.

Methods: In this review, we summarize existing reports on heterogeneous phantoms with a focus on simulating tumor heterogeneity. We discuss the techniques, materials, advantages, and limitations of the existing phantoms for PET, CT, and MR imaging modalities.

Conclusions: Finally, we outline the future directions and requirements for the design of cross modality imaging phantoms.

Citing Articles

Multicentric study on the reproducibility and robustness of PET-based radiomics features with a realistic activity painting phantom.

Kallos-Balogh P, Vas N, Toth Z, Szakall S, Szabo P, Garai I PLoS One. 2024; 19(10):e0309540.

PMID: 39446842 PMC: 11500893. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0309540.

Hydrogel System with Independent Tailoring of Mechanics, CT, and US Contrasts for Affordable Medical Phantoms.

Qiu H, Nazarenus J, Egeler B, Thode T, Osman F, Osmonov D ACS Mater Lett. 2024; 6(10):4847-4853.

PMID: 39391745 PMC: 11463687. DOI: 10.1021/acsmaterialslett.4c01660.

Oncologic Applications of Artificial Intelligence and Deep Learning Methods in CT Spine Imaging-A Systematic Review.

Ong W, Lee A, Tan W, Fong K, Lai D, Tan Y Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(17).

PMID: 39272846 PMC: 11394591. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16172988.

Assessment of lesion insertion tool in pelvis PET/MR data with applications to attenuation correction method development.

Natsuaki Y, Leynes A, Wangerin K, Hamdi M, Rajagopal A, Kinahan P J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2024; 25(11):e14507.

PMID: 39231184 PMC: 11539964. DOI: 10.1002/acm2.14507.

3D-printing inherently MRI-visible accessories in aiding MRI-guided biopsies.

Wang Y 3D Print Med. 2024; 10(1):27.

PMID: 39102062 PMC: 11299307. DOI: 10.1186/s41205-024-00227-w.

References

Lerski R, Schad L . The use of reticulated foam in texture test objects for magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Imaging. 1998; 16(9):1139-44. DOI: 10.1016/s0730-725x(98)00096-4. View

Larsson S, Jonsson C, Pagani M, Johansson L, Jacobsson H . A novel phantom design for emission tomography enabling scatter- and attenuation-"free" single-photon emission tomography imaging. Eur J Nucl Med. 2001; 27(2):131-9. DOI: 10.1007/s002590050018. View

Forgacs A, Pall Jonsson H, Dahlbom M, Daver F, DiFranco M, Opposits G . A Study on the Basic Criteria for Selecting Heterogeneity Parameters of F18-FDG PET Images. PLoS One. 2016; 11(10):e0164113. PMC: 5063296. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0164113. View

Pepin K, Ehman R, McGee K . Magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) in cancer: Technique, analysis, and applications. Prog Nucl Magn Reson Spectrosc. 2015; 90-91:32-48. PMC: 4660259. DOI: 10.1016/j.pnmrs.2015.06.001. View

Filippou V, Tsoumpas C . Recent advances on the development of phantoms using 3D printing for imaging with CT, MRI, PET, SPECT, and ultrasound. Med Phys. 2018; . PMC: 6849595. DOI: 10.1002/mp.13058. View

Liu Z, Wang S, Dong D, Wei J, Fang C, Zhou X . The Applications of Radiomics in Precision Diagnosis and Treatment of Oncology: Opportunities and Challenges. Theranostics. 2019; 9(5):1303-1322. PMC: 6401507. DOI: 10.7150/thno.30309. View

Shafiq-Ul-Hassan M, Zhang G, Latifi K, Ullah G, Hunt D, Balagurunathan Y . Intrinsic dependencies of CT radiomic features on voxel size and number of gray levels. Med Phys. 2017; 44(3):1050-1062. PMC: 5462462. DOI: 10.1002/mp.12123. View

Berthon B, Marshall C, Holmes R, Spezi E . A novel phantom technique for evaluating the performance of PET auto-segmentation methods in delineating heterogeneous and irregular lesions. EJNMMI Phys. 2015; 2(1):13. PMC: 4538718. DOI: 10.1186/s40658-015-0116-1. View

Schwartz L, Litiere S, de Vries E, Ford R, Gwyther S, Mandrekar S . RECIST 1.1-Update and clarification: From the RECIST committee. Eur J Cancer. 2016; 62:132-7. PMC: 5737828. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2016.03.081. View

10.

Waugh S, Lerski R, Bidaut L, Thompson A . The influence of field strength and different clinical breast MRI protocols on the outcome of texture analysis using foam phantoms. Med Phys. 2011; 38(9):5058-66. DOI: 10.1118/1.3622605. View

11.

Kadrmas D, Casey M, Conti M, Jakoby B, Lois C, Townsend D . Impact of time-of-flight on PET tumor detection. J Nucl Med. 2009; 50(8):1315-23. PMC: 2786272. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.109.063016. View

12.

Gallas R, Hunemohr N, Runz A, Niebuhr N, Jakel O, Greilich S . An anthropomorphic multimodality (CT/MRI) head phantom prototype for end-to-end tests in ion radiotherapy. Z Med Phys. 2015; 25(4):391-399. DOI: 10.1016/j.zemedi.2015.05.003. View

13.

Shikhaliev P . Dedicated phantom materials for spectral radiography and CT. Phys Med Biol. 2012; 57(6):1575-93. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/57/6/1575. View

14.

Berenguer R, Pastor-Juan M, Canales-Vazquez J, Castro-Garcia M, Villas M, Mansilla Legorburo F . Radiomics of CT Features May Be Nonreproducible and Redundant: Influence of CT Acquisition Parameters. Radiology. 2018; 288(2):407-415. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2018172361. View

15.

Fatima N, Zaman M, Gnanasegaran G, Zaman U, Shahid W, Zaman A . Hybrid Imaging in Oncology. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2015; 16(14):5599-605. DOI: 10.7314/apjcp.2015.16.14.5599. View

16.

Mayerhoefer M, Szomolanyi P, Jirak D, Berg A, Materka A, Dirisamer A . Effects of magnetic resonance image interpolation on the results of texture-based pattern classification: a phantom study. Invest Radiol. 2009; 44(7):405-11. DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181a50a66. View

17.

Steinmann A, Stafford R, Sawakuchi G, Wen Z, Court L, Fuller C . Developing and characterizing MR/CT-visible materials used in QA phantoms for MRgRT systems. Med Phys. 2017; 45(2):773-782. PMC: 5807190. DOI: 10.1002/mp.12700. View

18.

Neri E, Del Re M, Paiar F, Erba P, Cocuzza P, Regge D . Radiomics and liquid biopsy in oncology: the holons of systems medicine. Insights Imaging. 2018; 9(6):915-924. PMC: 6269342. DOI: 10.1007/s13244-018-0657-7. View

19.

McIlvain G, Ganji E, Cooper C, Killian M, Ogunnaike B, Johnson C . Reliable preparation of agarose phantoms for use in quantitative magnetic resonance elastography. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2019; 97:65-73. PMC: 6699912. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2019.05.001. View

20.

Mayerhoefer M, Szomolanyi P, Jirak D, Materka A, Trattnig S . Effects of MRI acquisition parameter variations and protocol heterogeneity on the results of texture analysis and pattern discrimination: an application-oriented study. Med Phys. 2009; 36(4):1236-43. DOI: 10.1118/1.3081408. View