ArticleMagnetic resonance imaging2012
Early experiences in establishing a regional quantitative imaging network for PET/CT clinical trials.
Article in Magnetic resonance imaging, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Qualification of National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers for Quantitative PET/CT Imaging in Clinical Trials.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2017Review
- Longitudinal monitoring of reconstructed activity concentration on a clinical time-of-flight PET/CT scanner.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2017Article
- Evaluation of Cross-CalibratedTomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2016Article
- Methods and challenges in quantitative imaging biomarker development.Academic radiology · 2015Review
- Clinical utility of quantitative imaging.Academic radiology · 2015Review
- Role of PET quantitation in the monitoring of cancer response to treatment: Review of approaches and human clinical trials.Clinical and translational imaging · 2014Article
- Biases in Multicenter Longitudinal PET Standardized Uptake Value Measurements.Translational oncology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The Seattle Cancer Care Alliance (SCCA) is a Pacific Northwest regional network that enables patients from community cancer centers to participate in multicenter oncology clinical trials where patients can receive some trial-related procedures at their local center. Results of positron emission tomography (PET) scans performed at community cancer centers are not currently used in SCCA Network trials since clinical trials customarily accept results from only trial-accredited PET imaging centers located at academic and large hospitals. Oncologists would prefer the option of using standard clinical PET scans from Network sites in multicenter clinical trials to increase accrual of patients for whom additional travel requirements for imaging are a barrier to recruitment. In an effort to increase accrual of rural and other underserved populations to Network trials, researchers and clinicians at the University of Washington, SCCA and its Network are assessing the feasibility of using PET scans from all Network sites in their oncology clinical trials. A feasibility study is required because the reproducibility of multicenter PET measurements ranges from approximately 3% to 40% at national academic centers. Early experiences from both national and local PET phantom imaging trials are discussed, and next steps are proposed for including patient PET scans from the emerging regional quantitative imaging network in clinical trials. There are feasible methods to determine and characterize PET quantitation errors and improve data quality by either prospective scanner calibration or retrospective post hoc corrections. These methods should be developed and implemented in multicenter clinical trials employing quantitative PET imaging of patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.