ReviewMolecular imaging and biology2015
Determination of the Input Function at the Entry of the Tissue of Interest and Its Impact on PET Kinetic Modeling Parameters.
Review 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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Brain PET imaging usingJournal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2024Article
- Pharmacokinetic neuroimaging to study the dose-related brain kinetics and target engagement of buprenorphine in vivo.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2021Article
- Hybrid PET/MR Kernelised Expectation Maximisation Reconstruction for Improved Image-Derived Estimation of the Input Function from the Aorta of Rabbits.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2019Article
- Non-invasive kinetic modelling of PET tracers with radiometabolites using a constrained simultaneous estimation method: evaluation withEJNMMI research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Quantitative positron emission tomography (PET) imaging is employed with several measurement protocols all relying on the a priori determination of the input function (IF). The standard technique to determine IF is by blood sampling. However, a unique IF determined in a subject for a given PET study, either defined by sampling or in the images, and commonly utilized for all analyzed tissues in that study equally at rest and during interventions, is expected to provoke biases in the rate constants and in tissue blood volume. The determination of a specific IF at the site of the tissue to be analyzed enhances PET accuracy and renders PET imaging less invasive.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26395903What 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.