Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22682020›Full record

ArticleEJNMMI research2012

Impact of inherent variability and experimental parameters on the reliability of small animal PET data.

Marianne Isabelle Martic-Kehl, Simon Mensah Ametamey, Malte Frederick Alf, Pius August Schubiger, Michael Honer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EJNMMI research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Deep-learning-derived input function in dynamic [Frontiers in nuclear medicine · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Can animal data predict human outcome? Problems and pitfalls of translational animal research.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2012
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Marianne Isabelle Martic-KehlCenter for Radiopharmaceutical Sciences of ETH, Institute of Pharmaceutical Science of ETH Zürich, Wolfgang-Pauli-Str, 10, Zurich, 8093, Switzerland. martic@collegium.ethz.ch.
Simon Mensah Ametamey
Malte Frederick Alf
Pius August Schubiger
Michael Honer

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNoninvasive preclinical imaging methodologies such as small animal positron emission tomography (PET) allow the repeated measurement of the same subject which is generally assumed to reduce the variability of the experimental outcome parameter and to produce more robust results. In this study, the variability of tracer uptake in the rodent brain was assessed within and between subjects using the established radiopharmaceuticals 18F-FDG and 18F-fallypride. Moreover, experimental factors with potential impact on study outcome were elicited, and the effect of their strict homogenization was assessed.

methodsBrain standardized uptake values of rodents were compared between three PET scans of the same animal and scans of different individuals. 18F-FDG ex vivo tissue sampling was performed under variation of the following experimental parameters: gender, age, cage occupancy, anesthetic protocol, environmental temperature during uptake phase, and tracer formulation.

resultsNo significant difference of variability in 18F-FDG or 18F-fallypride brain or striatal uptake was identified between scans of the same and scans of different animals (COV = 14 ± 7% vs. 21 ± 10% for 18F-FDG). 18F-FDG brain uptake was robust regarding a variety of experimental parameters; only anesthetic protocols showed a significant impact. In contrast to a heterogenization approach, homogenization of groups produced more false positive effects in 18F-FDG organ distribution showing a false positive rate of 9% vs. 6%.

conclusionsRepeated measurements of the same animal may not reduce data variability compared with measurements on different animals. Controlled heterogenization of test groups with regard to experimental parameters is advisable as it decreases the generation of false positive results and thus increases external validity of study outcome.

Identifiers

PMID22682020
PMCPMC3438085

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.