ReviewMagnetic resonance imaging2012
Quantitative assessment of dynamic PET imaging data in cancer imaging.
Review 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 57 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
57 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effect of addiction on brain glucose metabolism assessed by PET/CT molecular imaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Brain imaging and behavior · 2026Pooled it
- Decreased insulin-stimulated brown adipose tissue glucose uptake after short-term exercise training in healthy middle-aged men.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2017Trial
- A virtual clinical trial comparing static versus dynamic PET imaging in measuring response to breast cancer therapy.Physics in medicine and biology · 2017Trial
- Optimization of a Q.Clear PET image reconstruction based on bayesian optimization in oncology and neurology applications.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2026Article
- Deep learning-derived arterial input function for dynamic brain PET.NeuroImage · 2025Article
- Validation of Lung [Molecular imaging and biology · 2025Article
- Longitudinal monitoring of bone remodelling activity around the acetabular cup after total hip arthroplasty using 18F-fluoride PET/CT scans.Bone & joint research · 2025Article
- Impact of deep learning denoising on kinetic modelling for low-dose dynamic PET: application to single- and dual-tracer imaging protocols.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025Article
- Impact of biocontainment on small animal PET performance adapted for BSL-2/3 infectious disease imaging research.EJNMMI research · 2025Article
- Dynamic FDG PET/CT for differentiating focal pelvic uptake in patients with gynecological cancer.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- An end-to-end deep learning pipeline to derive blood input with partial volume corrections for automated parametric brain PET mapping.Biomedical physics & engineering express · 2024Article
- Combined whole-body dynamic and static PET/CT with low-dose [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Article
- A Review of Machine Learning Approaches for Brain Positron Emission Tomography Data Analysis.Nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Review
- Clinical feasibility study of early 30-minute dynamic FDG-PET scanning protocol for patients with lung lesions.EJNMMI physics · 2024Article
- Comparison of tracer kinetic models forEJNMMI research · 2024Article
- Engineered aptamers for molecular imaging.Chemical science · 2023Review
- Comparison of Tracer Kinetic Models for 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET in Intermediate Risk Primary Prostate Cancer Patients.Research square · 2023Article
- Metabolic Imaging as a Tool to Characterize Chemoresistance and Guide Therapy in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC).Molecular cancer research : MCR · 2023Article
- Quantitation of dynamic total-body PET imaging: recent developments and future perspectives.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023Review
- Diagnostic Value of DynamicDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Clinical imaging in positron emission tomography (PET) is often performed using single-time-point estimates of tracer uptake or static imaging that provides a spatial map of regional tracer concentration. However, dynamic tracer imaging can provide considerably more information about in vivo biology by delineating both the temporal and spatial pattern of tracer uptake. In addition, several potential sources of error that occur in static imaging can be mitigated. This review focuses on the application of dynamic PET imaging to measuring regional cancer biologic features and especially in using dynamic PET imaging for quantitative therapeutic response monitoring for cancer clinical trials. Dynamic PET imaging output parameters, particularly transport (flow) and overall metabolic rate, have provided imaging end points for clinical trials at single-center institutions for years. However, dynamic imaging poses many challenges for multicenter clinical trial implementations from cross-center calibration to the inadequacy of a common informatics infrastructure. Underlying principles and methodology of PET dynamic imaging are first reviewed, followed by an examination of current approaches to dynamic PET image analysis with a specific case example of dynamic fluorothymidine imaging to illustrate the approach.
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.