ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2018
Assessment of a statistical AIF extraction method for dynamic PET studies with
Article in Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient-Adaptive Population-Based Modeling of Arterial Input Functions.IEEE transactions on medical imaging · 2023Article
- Quantitation of multiple injection dynamic PET scans: an investigation of the benefits of pooling data from separate scans when mapping kinetics.Physics in medicine and biology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Blood flow-metabolism mismatch from dynamic positron emission tomography (PET) studies with [Formula: see text]-labeled water ([Formula: see text]) and [Formula: see text]-labeled fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) has been shown to be a promising diagnostic for locally advanced breast cancer (LABCa) patients. The mismatch measurement involves kinetic analysis with the arterial blood time course (AIF) as an input function. We evaluate the use of a statistical method for AIF extraction (SAIF) in these studies. Fifty three LABCa patients had dynamic PET studies with [Formula: see text] and FDG. For each PET study, two AIFs were recovered, an SAIF extraction and also a manual extraction based on a region of interest placed over the left ventricle (LV-ROI). Blood flow-metabolism mismatch was obtained with each AIF, and kinetic and prognostic reliability comparisons were made. Strong correlations were found between kinetic assessments produced by both AIFs. SAIF AIFs retained the full prognostic value, for pathologic response and overall survival, of LV-ROI AIFs.
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.