ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2018
Measuring temporal stability of positron emission tomography standardized uptake value bias using long-lived sources in a multicenter network.
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. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Operational and Performance Experience with uMI550 Digital PET-CT during Routine Quality Control Procedures.World journal of nuclear medicine · 2023Article
- Variability in PET image quality and quantification measured with a permanently filledEJNMMI physics · 2023Article
- COMP Report: CPQR technical quality control guidelines for use of positron emission tomography/computed tomography in radiation treatment planning.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2022Review
- Measurement of PET Quantitative Bias In Vivo.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2021Article
- Bias in PET Images of Solid Phantoms Due to CT-Based Attenuation Correction.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2019Article
- Prospective Study of SerialJournal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2018Article
- Simultaneous Estimation of Bias and Resolution in PET Images With a Long-Lived "Pocket" Phantom System.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
14 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Positron emission tomography (PET) is a quantitative imaging modality, but the computation of standardized uptake values (SUVs) requires several instruments to be correctly calibrated. Variability in the calibration process may lead to unreliable quantitation. Sealed source kits containing traceable amounts of [Formula: see text] were used to measure signal stability for 19 PET scanners at nine hospitals in the National Cancer Institute's Quantitative Imaging Network. Repeated measurements of the sources were performed on PET scanners and in dose calibrators. The measured scanner and dose calibrator signal biases were used to compute the bias in SUVs at multiple time points for each site over a 14-month period. Estimation of absolute SUV accuracy was confounded by bias from the solid phantoms' physical properties. On average, the intrascanner coefficient of variation for SUV measurements was 3.5%. Over the entire length of the study, single-scanner SUV values varied over a range of 11%. Dose calibrator bias was not correlated with scanner bias. Calibration factors from the image metadata were nearly as variable as scanner signal, and were correlated with signal for many scanners. SUVs often showed low intrascanner variability between successive measurements but were also prone to shifts in apparent bias, possibly in part due to scanner recalibrations that are part of regular scanner quality control. Biases of key factors in the computation of SUVs were not correlated and their temporal variations did not cancel out of the computation. Long-lived sources and image metadata may provide a check on the recalibration process.
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.