Consistency Analysis of Centiloid Values Across Three Commercial Software Platforms for Amyloid PET Quantification
<b>Objectives</b>: This study aimed to evaluate the consistency of Centiloid (CL) values calculated using three commercially available software platforms: BTXBrain (v1.1.2), MIM (v7.3.7), and SCALE PET (v2.0.1). <b>Methods</b>: A total of 239 patients who underwent amyloid PE...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2025-06-01
|
| Series: | Diagnostics |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/15/13/1599 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | <b>Objectives</b>: This study aimed to evaluate the consistency of Centiloid (CL) values calculated using three commercially available software platforms: BTXBrain (v1.1.2), MIM (v7.3.7), and SCALE PET (v2.0.1). <b>Methods</b>: A total of 239 patients who underwent amyloid PET/CT with either F-18 flutemetamol (FMM) or F-18 florbetaben (FBB) were retrospectively analyzed. CL values were calculated using BTXBrain, MIM, and SCALE PET. Linear regression, Passing–Bablok regression, and Bland–Altman analysis were performed to assess the agreement between CL values. Subgroup analyses were conducted for each radiotracer. CL values were compared according to visual interpretation status. <b>Results</b>: Strong correlations were observed between CL values derived from the three software platforms (R<sup>2</sup> > 0.95). However, Passing–Bablok regression revealed significant proportional bias, with CL values from BTXBrain being lower than others, and CL values from SCALE PET being higher than others as CL values increased. Bland–Altman plots visualized the proportional bias, particularly between BTXBrain and SCALE PET. Subgroup analyses by radiotracer showed similar results. CL values in visually positive scans were significantly higher than those in visually negative scans across all platforms. <b>Conclusions</b>: The three commercial software programs demonstrated high consistency in CL quantification. However, a notable systematic bias was observed. Further evaluation of various scanner effects and CL calculation methods is warranted to improve the consistency and reproducibility of CL quantification in clinical practice. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2075-4418 |