Table 2.
Single time point analyses and Inter-time point analyses comparing relative differences between PET1 and PET2: Results for response prediction at interim PET (PET2) and Δ-analyses using receiver operating characteristics.
| Visual Assessment | No. | AUC | 95% CI (%) | p Value | Cut-off (Absolute) | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | PPV (%) | NPV (%) | TP | TN | FP | FN | Accuracy (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 54 | 0.69 | 0.47 | 0.044 (n.s.) | 66.7 | 70.8 | 22.2 | 94.4 | 4 | 34 | 14 | 2 | 70.4 | |||
| SUV | SUVmax2 | 54 | 0.91 | 0.83–1 | <0.0001 | >2.5 | 100 | 75.0 | 33.3 | 100 | 6 | 36 | 12 | 0 | 77.8 |
| SUVmean2 | 54 | 0.90 | 0.80–0.99 | <0.0001 | >2.5 | 100 | 75.0 | 33.3 | 100 | 6 | 36 | 12 | 0 | 77.8 | |
| MTV2 | 54 | 0.90 | 0.80–1 | <0.0001 | >0 mL | 100 | 70.8 | 30.0 | 100 | 6 | 34 | 14 | 0 | 74.1 | |
| TLGmean2 | 54 | 0.90 | 0.81–1 | <0.0001 | >0.3 g | 100 | 75.0 | 33.3 | 100 | 6 | 36 | 12 | 0 | 77.8 | |
| ΔSUV | ΔSUVmax | 54 | 0.92 | 0.85–1 | <0.0001 | <78.0% | 100 | 85.4 | 46.2 | 100 | 6 | 41 | 7 | 0 | 87.0 |
| ΔSUVmean | 54 | 0.90 | 0.81–0.98 | <0.0001 | <48.0% | 100 | 81.3 | 40.0 | 100 | 6 | 39 | 9 | 0 | 83.3 | |
| ΔMTV | 54 | 0.89 | 0.79–0.98 | <0.0001 | <99.9% | 100 | 81.3 | 40.0 | 100 | 6 | 39 | 9 | 0 | 83.3 | |
| ΔTLGmean | 54 | 0.90 | 0.81–0.99 | <0.0001 | <99.95% | 100 | 81.3 | 40.0 | 100 | 6 | 39 | 9 | 0 | 83.3 | |
| SUL | SULmax2 | 54 | 0.88 | 0.78–0.98 | <0.0001 | >2.1 | 100 | 75.0 | 33.3 | 100 | 6 | 36 | 12 | 0 | 77.8 |
| SULmean2 | 54 | 0.86 | 0.76–0.97 | <0.0001 | >1.8 | 83.3 | 85.4 | 41.7 | 97.6 | 5 | 41 | 7 | 1 | 85.2 | |
| MTV2_liver_cor. | 54 | 0.81 | 0.65–0.98 | <0.0001 | >4.1 mL | 83.3 | 77.1 | 31.3 | 97.4 | 5 | 37 | 11 | 1 | 77.8 | |
| TLGmean2_liver_cor. | 54 | 0.83 | 0.67–0.99 | <0.0001 | >0 g | 100 | 47.9 | 19.4 | 100 | 6 | 23 | 25 | 0 | 53.7 | |
| ΔSUL | ΔSULmax | 54 | 0.86 | 0.75–0.98 | <0.0001 | <83.3% | 100 | 66.7 | 27.3 | 100 | 6 | 32 | 16 | 0 | 70.4 |
| ΔSULmean | 54 | 0.84 | 0.73–0.95 | <0.0001 | <45.2% | 100 | 75.0 | 33.3 | 100 | 6 | 36 | 12 | 1 | 77.8 | |
| ΔMTV_liver_cor. | 54 | 0.79 | 0.63–0.95 | 0,0002 | <99.9% | 100 | 56.3 | 22.2 | 100 | 6 | 27 | 21 | 0 | 61.1 | |
| ΔTLGmean_liver_cor. | 54 | 0.79 | 0.62–0.95 | <0.0003 | <99.93 | 100 | 56.3 | 22.2 | 100 | 6 | 27 | 21 | 0 | 61.1 | |
Abbreviations: Δ, delta signal reduction of PET2 compared to PET1 expressed in percent; No., number of patients included for analyses; AUC, area under the curve; CI, confidence interval; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value; TP, true positive; TN, true negative; FP, false positive; FN, false negative; n.s., not significant after FDR correction for multiple comparisons, SUV, standardized uptake value; max, maximal; SUL, standardized uptake value, lean body mass and background (liver) corrected; MTV, metabolic tumor volume; TLG, tumor lesion glycolysis.