Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28370695›Full record

ReviewJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2017

PET/MRI: Where might it replace PET/CT?

Eric C Ehman, Geoffrey B Johnson, Javier E Villanueva-Meyer, Soonmee Cha, Andrew Palmera Leynes, Peder Eric Zufall Larson, Thomas A Hope

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 129 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
129citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

129 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Joint EANM-SNMMI guideline on the role of 2-[European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024
    Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Prognostic utility ofEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025
    Trial
  6. Prospective comparison ofEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2019
    Trial
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. The value of targeting CXCR4 withEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. [American journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Designing a Small Molecule for PET Radiotracing: [Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  20. Article

69 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Eric C EhmanDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Geoffrey B JohnsonDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Javier E Villanueva-MeyerDepartment of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, California.
Soonmee ChaDepartment of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, California.
Andrew Palmera LeynesDepartment of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, California.
Peder Eric Zufall LarsonDepartment of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, California.
Thomas A HopeDepartment of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, California.

Funding

Biomedical Imaging for Clinician ScientistsT32EB001631 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI THOMAS M LINK · 2005 to 2026
$5.6M
Qualification and Harmonization of PET/MRI for Cancer Clinical TrialsR01CA212148 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI HOPE, THOMAS, LAFOREST, RICHARD ANDRE · 2017 to 2022
$2.7M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA212148NIBIB NIH HHS T32 EB001631
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Simultaneous positron emission tomography and MRI (PET/MRI) is a technology that combines the anatomic and quantitative strengths of MR imaging with physiologic information obtained from PET. PET and computed tomography (PET/CT) performed in a single scanning session is an established technology already in widespread and accepted use worldwide. Given the higher cost and complexity of operating and interpreting the studies obtained on a PET/MRI system, there has been question as to which patients would benefit most from imaging with PET/MRI versus PET/CT. In this article, we compare PET/MRI with PET/CT, detail the applications for which PET/MRI has shown promise and discuss impediments to future adoption. It is our hope that future work will prove the benefit of PET/MRI to specific groups of patients, initially those in which PET/CT and MRI are already performed, leveraging simultaneity and allowing for greater degrees of multiparametric evaluation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5 Technical Efficacy: Stage 5 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2017;46:1247-1262.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingPositron-Emission TomographyPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyAdultAgedCohort StudiesFemaleGallium RadioisotopesHeterocyclic Compounds, 1-RingHumansInfectionsInflammationLiver NeoplasmsLymphoproliferative DisordersMaleMiddle Aged1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane- 1,4,7,10-tetraacetic acidGallium RadioisotopesHeterocyclic Compounds, 1-RingCTMRIPETPET/CTPET/MRI

Identifiers

PMID28370695
PMCPMC5623147

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.