ArticleMolecular imaging and biology2015
Comparison of HRRT and HR+ scanners for quantitative (R)-[11C]verapamil, [11C]raclopride and [11C]flumazenil brain studies.
Article in Molecular imaging and biology, 2015. 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.
- Systemic inflammation enhances stimulant-induced striatal dopamine elevation in tobacco smokers.Brain, behavior, and immunity · 2022Trial
- Harmonization of [EJNMMI physics · 2022Article
- Model selection criteria for dynamic brain PET studies.EJNMMI physics · 2017Article
- Partial volume correction of brain PET studies using iterative deconvolution in combination with HYPR denoising.EJNMMI research · 2017Article
- Reproducibility of Quantitative Brain Imaging Using a PET-Only and a Combined PET/MR System.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2017Article
- Impact of New Scatter Correction Strategies on High-Resolution Research Tomograph Brain PET Studies.Molecular imaging and biology · 2016Article
- Commentary: an eye on PET quantification.Molecular imaging and biology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study was conducted to directly compare the high-resolution research tomograph (HRRT) (high-resolution brain) and HR+ (standard whole-body) positron emission tomography (PET) only scanners for quantitative brain studies using three tracers with vastly different tracer distributions. PROCEDURES: Healthy volunteers underwent successive scans on HR+ and HRRT scanners (in random order) using either (R)-[(11)C]verapamil (n = 6), [(11)C]raclopride (n = 7) or [(11)C]flumazenil (n = 7). For all tracers, metabolite-corrected plasma-input functions were generated.
resultsAfter resolution matching, HRRT-derived kinetic parameter values correlated well with those of HR+ for all tracers (intraclass correlation coefficients ≥0.78), having a good absolute interscanner test-retest variability (≤15 %). However, systematic differences can be seen for HRRT-derived kinetic parameter values (range -13 to +15 %).
conclusionQuantification of kinetic parameters based on plasma-input models leads to comparable results when spatial resolution between HRRT and HR+ data is matched. When using reference-tissue models, differences remain that are likely caused by differences in attenuation and scatter corrections and/or image reconstruction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25028091What 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.