| Question 1: The optimal FDG PET/CT imaging window for assessing response and adapting chemoradiotherapy of locally advanced lung cancer is: |
| Reference: | Bissonnette JP, Yap ML, Clarke K, Shessel A, Higgins J, Vines D, Atenafu EG, Becker N, Leavens C, Bezjak A, Jaffray DA, Sun A. Serial 4DCT/4DPET imaging to predict and monitor response for locally-advanced non-small cell lung cancer chemo-radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2018 Feb;126(2):347-354. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2017.11.023. Epub 2017 Dec 12. |
| Choice A: | Baseline |
| Choice B: | <2 weeks |
| Choice C: | 2-4 weeks |
| Choice D: | >4 weeks |
| Question 2: Which radiation treatment strategy is most sensitive to improvements in quantitative PET performance: |
| Reference: | Bentzen SM. Theragnostic imaging for radiation oncology: dose-painting by numbers. Lancet Oncol. 2005 Feb;6(2):112-7 |
| Choice A: | Uniform radiation dose to anatomic target volumes |
| Choice B: | Simultaneous integrated radiation dose boosting |
| Choice C: | Spatially non-uniform radiation dose scaled by target voxel biological disease burden or treatment resistance |
| Choice D: | Uniform radiation dose to functional / biological target volumes |
| Question 3: Advances in PET imaging are needed to improve clinical applications such as: |
| Reference: | Koopman D, van Dalen JA, Stevens H, Slump CH, Knollema S, Jager PL. Performance of Digital PET Compared with High-Resolution Conventional PET in Patients with Cancer. J Nucl Med. 2020 Oct;61(10):1448-1454. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.119.238105.
Epub 2020 Feb 14. Erratum in: J Nucl Med. 2020 Dec;61(12):1851. PMID: 32060217. |
| Choice A: | Cancer lesion detectability |
| Choice B: | Targeted radionuclide / radiopharmaceutical therapy assessment |
| Choice C: | Low-dose imaging in pediatric patients |
| Choice D: | Discrimination of cancer progression versus pseudoprogression |
| Choice E: | All of the above. |
| Question 4: Silicon photo-multiplier (SiPM) used in the emerging generation solid state PET systems is an array of: |
| Reference: | G. Bondarenko, Buzhan P, Dolgoshein B, Smirnov K. Limited Geiger Mode Microcell Photodiode: new results. Nuclear Instruments and Methods. 2000; A442: 187-92.
Dennis R. Schaart. Introduction to Silicon Photomultipliers for Time-of-Flight PET. 2020. DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-43040-5_3. In book: Advances in PET (pp.27-40)
P. Lecoq, S. Gundacker. SiPM applications in positron emission tomography: toward ultimate PET time-of-flight resolution. Eur. Phys. J. Plus (2021) 136:292; https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-01183-8 |
| Choice A: | Photomultiplier tubes (PMTs) |
| Choice B: | Avalanche photodiodes (APDs) |
| Choice C: | Single-photon avalanche diodes (SPADs) |
| Choice D: | Geiger-mode avalanche photodiodes (GM-APDs) |
| Choice E: | b) and c) |
| Choice F: | c) and d) |
| Question 5: For a large size patient with 60cm in diameter, an estimated SNR improvement of a 200ps TOF PET compared to nonTOF PET is about_______which is______ fold compared to the SNR improvement of a 500ps TOF PET. |
| Reference: | Karp JS. Surti S, Daube-Witherspoon ME and Muehllehner G. Advances in Time-Of-Flight PET. Phys Med, 32(1): 12-22.
Budinger TF. Time-of-Flight Positron Emission Tomography - Status Relative to Conventional PET. J Nucl Med. 1983;24(1):73–76. |
| Choice A: | 3.0 and 7.5 |
| Choice B: | 20.0 and 8.0 |
| Choice C: | 4.5 and 2.8 |
| Choice D: | 4.5 and 1.6 |
| Question 6: A 2-meter total body TOF PET system may provide gains of about________fold in sensitivity for wholebody PET applications compared to a conventional 20-cm-axial FOV PET scanner? |
| Reference: | Ramsey D Badawi, Hongcheng Shi, Pengcheng Hu, Shuguang Chen, Tianyi Xu, Patricia M Price, et al. First Human Imaging Studies with the EXPLORER Total-Body PET Scanner. J Nucl Med. 2019 Mar;60(3):299-303. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.119.226498.
Vandenberghe, S., Moskal, P. & Karp, J.S. State of the art in total body PET. EJNMMI Phys 7, 35 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40658-020-00290-2. |
| Choice A: | 5 |
| Choice B: | 10 |
| Choice C: | 40 |
| Choice D: | 100 |
