ArticleEJNMMI research2016
For avid glucose tumors, the SUV peak is the most reliable parameter for [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT quantification, regardless of acquisition time.
Article in EJNMMI research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 64 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
64 citing papers in PubMed.
- Functional Parameters ofContrast media & molecular imaging · 2018Trial
- Evaluation of deep learning-based reconstruction models on non-TOF BGO PET/CT: impact of acquisition times and BSREM penalization factors on lesion detectability and SNR.EJNMMI physics · 2026Article
- Improving the predictive value of end-of-treatment PET/ CT in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.Haematologica · 2026Article
- Complementary prognostic value of hotspot-to-centroid distance (NHOCpeak) to SUVpeak in high-grade glioma.Annals of nuclear medicine · 2026Article
- Impact of local tumor-to-background uptake ratio on PET metabolic response assessment.Radiation protection dosimetry · 2026Article
- Integrated primary tumor and all metastatic lymph nodes radiomics from 18 F-FDG PET/CT for precise M1 subclassification in nasopharyngeal carcinoma.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Lesion conspicuity by size in [EJNMMI research · 2026Article
- Performance of PSMA-PET/CT as verified by bone biopsy for diagnosing osseous metastases of prostate cancer.Skeletal radiology · 2025Article
- New full-counts phase-matched data-driven gated (DDG) PET/CT.Medical physics · 2024Article
- Evaluating the immunologically "cold" tumor microenvironment after treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors utilizing PET imaging of CD4 + and CD8 + T cells in breast cancer mouse models.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2024Article
- FDG imaging with long-axial field-of-view PET/CT in patients with high blood glucose-a matched pair analysis.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Article
- Validation of the 2018 FIGO staging system for stage IIIC cervical cancer by determining the metabolic and radiomic heterogeneity of primary tumors based onAbdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Article
- FDG uptake of pulmonary lesions in synchronous primary lung cancers and lung metastases.Research in diagnostic and interventional imaging · 2024Article
- Evaluation of Malignancy Risk of Ampullary Tumors Detected by Endoscopy Using 2-[Korean journal of radiology · 2024Article
- The Utility ofClinical Medicine Insights. Oncology · 2024Article
- Whole-body PET image denoising for reduced acquisition time.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Review
- Application of preoperative fluorodeoxyglucose-PET/CT parameters for predicting prognosis of high-grade neuroendocrine cervical cancer.Nuclear medicine communications · 2023Article
- Advancements and Future Outlook of PET/CT-Guided Interventions.Techniques in vascular and interventional radiology · 2023Review
- Sub-minute acquisition with deep learning-based image filter in the diagnosis of colorectal cancers using total-bodyEJNMMI research · 2023Article
4 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study is an assessment of the impact of acquisition times on SUV with [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT on healthy livers (reference organ with stable uptake over time) and on tumors.
methodsOne hundred six [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT were acquired in list mode over a single-bed position (livers (n = 48) or on tumors (n = 58)). Six independent datasets of different durations were reconstructed (from 1.5 to 10 min). SUVmax (hottest voxel), SUVpeak (maximum average SUV within a 1-cm(3) spherical volume), and SUVaverage were measured within a 3-cm-diameter volume of interest (VOI) in the right lobe of the liver. For [(18)F]FDG avid tumors (SUVmax ≥ 5), the SUVmax, SUVpeak, and SUV41% (isocontour threshold method) were computed.
resultsFor tumors, SUVpeak values did not vary with acquisition time. SUVmax displayed significant differences between 1.5- and 5-10-min reconstruction times. SUV41% was the most time-dependent parameter. For the liver, the SUVaverage was the sole parameter that did not vary over time.
conclusionsFor [(18)F]FDG avid tumors, with short acquisition times, i.e., with new generations of PET systems, the SUVpeak may be more robust than the SUVmax. The SUVaverage over a 3-cm-diameter VOI in the right lobe of the liver appears to be a good method for a robust and reproducible assessment of the hepatic metabolism.
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.