Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29766354›Full record

ArticleEJNMMI physics2018

Image-based SPECT calibration based on the evaluation of the Fraction of Activity in the Field of View.

Adrien Halty, Jean-Noël Badel, Olga Kochebina, David Sarrut

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EJNMMI physics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Quantitative analysis ofEJNMMI physics · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Adrien HaltyUniv Lyon, INSA-Lyon, Université Lyon 1, CNRS, Inserm, CREATIS UMR 5220, U1206, Lyon, 69008, France. adrien.halty@creatis.insa-lyon.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5176-3126
Jean-Noël BadelUniv Lyon, Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, 69008, France.
Olga KochebinaUniv Lyon, INSA-Lyon, Université Lyon 1, CNRS, Inserm, CREATIS UMR 5220, U1206, Lyon, 69008, France.
David SarrutUniv Lyon, INSA-Lyon, Université Lyon 1, CNRS, Inserm, CREATIS UMR 5220, U1206, Lyon, 69008, France.
Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 · FR

Funding

ANR ANR-11-LABX-0063INCA-DGOS INCa-DGOS-4664
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSPECT quantification is important for dosimetry in targeted radionuclide therapy (TRT) and the calibration of SPECT images is a crucial stage for image quantification. The current standardized calibration protocol (MIRD 23) uses phantom acquisitions to derive a global calibration factor in specific conditions. It thus requires specific acquisitions for every clinical protocols. We proposed an alternative and complementary image-based calibration method that allows to determine a calibration factor adapted to each patient, radionuclide, and acquisition protocol and that may also be used as an additional independent calibration.

resultsThe proposed method relies on a SPECT/CT acquisition of a given region of interest and an initial whole-body (WB) planar image. First, the conjugate view of WB planar images is computed after scatter and attenuation correction. 3D SPECT images are reconstructed with scatter, attenuation, and collimator-detector response (CDR) corrections and corrected from apparent dead-time. The field of view (FOV) of the SPECT image is then projected on the corrected WB planar image. The fraction of activity located in the area corresponding to the SPECT FOV is then calculated based on the counts on the corrected WB planar image. The Fraction of Activity in Field Of View (FAF) is then proposed to compute the calibration factor as the total number of counts in the SPECT image divided by this activity. Quantification accuracy was compared with the standard calibration method both with phantom experiments and on patient data. Both standard and image-based calibrations give good accuracy on large region of interest on phantom experiments (less than 7% of relative difference compared to ground truth). Apparent dead-time correction allows to reduce the uncertainty associated with standard calibration from 2.5 to 1%. The differences found between both methods were lower than the uncertainty range of the standard calibration (<3%). In patient data, although no ground truth was available, both methods give similar calibration factor (average difference 3.64%).

conclusionsA calibration factor may be computed directly from the acquired SPECT image providing that a WB planar image is also available and if both acquisitions are performed before biological elimination. This method does not require to perform phantom acquisition for every different acquisition conditions and may serve to double check the calibration with an independent factor.

Indexed as

Absorbed dose estimationSPECT calibrationTargeted radionuclide therapy

Identifiers

PMID29766354
PMCPMC5953912
OpenAlexW2804191678

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.