ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2016
The engagement of FDG PET/CT image quality and harmonized quantification: from competitive to complementary.
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical Robustness of FDG-PET/CT Quantitative Metrics Post-Harmonization in a Multicenter, Cross-Scanner Setting.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2026Article
- Harmonisation of standard uptake values in long-axial field-of-view PET/CT: an exploratory study.EJNMMI physics · 2026Article
- FDG PET/CT for Assessment of Immune Therapy: Opportunities and Understanding Pitfalls.Seminars in nuclear medicine · 2020Review
- Recent Survey of Effective Doses of F-18 FDG Torso PET/CT in Korea and the Current Recommendations for CT Protocols of PET/CT.Nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2020Article
- Evaluation of PET quantitation accuracy among multiple discovery IQ PET/CT systems via NEMA image quality test.EJNMMI physics · 2020Article
- Impact of PET reconstruction protocols on quantification of lesions that fulfil the PERCIST lesion inclusion criteria.EJNMMI physics · 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
The use of (18)F-FDG PET/CT as a quantitative imaging biomarker requires standardization and harmonization of imaging procedures and PET/CT system performance to obtain repeatable and reproducible quantitative data. However, a PET/CT system optimized to meet international quantitative standards is not necessarily optimized for use as a diagnostic tool (i.e. for lesion detectability). Several solutions have been proposed and validated, but until recently none of them had been implemented commercially. Vendor-provided solutions allowing the use of PET/CT both as a diagnostic tool and as a quantitative imaging biomarker are therefore greatly needed and would be highly appreciated. In this invited perspective one such solution is highlighted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26424722What 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.