Trial reportNuclear medicine communications2014
Calibrated image-derived input functions for the determination of the metabolic uptake rate of glucose with [18F]-FDG PET.
Trial report in Nuclear medicine communications, 2014. 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.
- PET AIF estimation when available ROI data is impacted by dispersive and/or background effects.Physics in medicine and biology · 2023Article
- Clinical validation of a population-based input function for 20-min dynamic whole-bodyEJNMMI physics · 2022Article
- Simulation study of a coincidence detection system for non-invasive determination of arterial blood time-activity curve measurements.EJNMMI physics · 2020Article
- Effects of High-Intensity Exercise Training on Adipose Tissue Mass, Glucose Uptake and Protein Content in Pre- and Post-menopausal Women.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2020Article
- Assessment of artery calcification in atherosclerosis with dynamic 18F-FDG-PET/CT imaging in elderly subjects.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2019Article
- Determination of the Input Function at the Entry of the Tissue of Interest and Its Impact on PET Kinetic Modeling Parameters.Molecular imaging and biology · 2015Review
- Application of calibrated image-derived input function to a clinical protocol.Nuclear medicine communications · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe investigated the use of a simple calibration method to remove bias in previously proposed approaches to image-derived input functions (IDIFs) when used to calculate the metabolic uptake rate of glucose (K(m)) from dynamic [(18)F]-FDG PET scans of the thigh. Our objective was to obtain nonbiased, low-variance K(m) values without blood sampling. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe evaluated eight previously proposed IDIF methods. K(m) values derived from these IDIFs were compared with Km values calculated from the arterial blood samples (gold standard). We used linear regression to extract calibration parameters to remove bias. Following calibration, cross-validation and bootstrapping were used to estimate the mean square error and variance.
resultsThree of the previously proposed methods failed mainly because of zero-crossings of the IDIF. The remaining five methods were improved by calibration, yielding unbiased Km values. The method with the lowest SD yielded an SD of 0.0017/min--that is, below 10% of the muscle K(m) value in this study.
conclusionPreviously proposed IDIF methods can be improved by using a simple calibration procedure. The calibration procedure may be used in other studies, thus obviating the need for arterial blood sampling, once the calibration parameters have been established in a subgroup of participants. The method has potential for use in other parts of the body as it is robust with regard to partial volume effects.
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.