ArticleEJNMMI physics2018
Inter-comparison of quantitative imaging of lutetium-177 (
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 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multicenter comparison of radionuclide calibrators and SPECT/CT protocols for quantitativeEJNMMI physics · 2026Article
- Activity quantification and dosimetry in radiopharmaceutical therapy with reference toFrontiers in nuclear medicine · 2024Review
- A Review on the Use of Imaging Biomarkers in Oncology Clinical Trials: Quality Assurance Strategies for Technical Validation.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2023Review
- An anthropomorphic body phantom for the determination of calibration factor in radionuclide treatment dosimetry.Radiation protection dosimetry · 2023Article
- Milestones in dosimetry for nuclear medicine therapy.The British journal of radiology · 2022Review
- EANM dosimetry committee recommendations for dosimetry of 177Lu-labelled somatostatin-receptor- and PSMA-targeting ligands.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022Article
- Imaging and dosimetry for alpha-particle emitter radiopharmaceutical therapy: improving radiopharmaceutical therapy by looking into the black box.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2021Review
- Practical kidney dosimetry in peptide receptor radionuclide therapy using [EJNMMI physics · 2021Article
- A multicentre and multi-national evaluation of the accuracy of quantitative Lu-177 SPECT/CT imaging performed within the MRTDosimetry project.EJNMMI physics · 2021Article
- The effect of calibration factors and recovery coefficients onEJNMMI physics · 2021Article
- Recommendations for Multicentre Clinical Trials Involving Dosimetry for Molecular Radiotherapy.Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)) · 2021Article
- Setting up a quantitative SPECT imaging network for a European multi-centre dosimetry study of radioiodine treatment for thyroid cancer as part of the MEDIRAD project.EJNMMI physics · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis inter-comparison exercise was performed to demonstrate the variability of quantitative SPECT/CT imaging for lutetium-177 (
resultsThe volumes reported by the participants for the inner section of the source were all within 29% of the true value and within 60% of the true value for the outer section. The activities reported by the participants for the inner section of the source were all within 20% of the true value, whilst those reported for the outer section were up to 83% different to the true value.
conclusionsA variety of calibration and segmentation methods were used by the participants for this exercise which demonstrated the variability of quantitative imaging across clinical sites. This paper presents a method to assess consistency between sites using different calibration and segmentation methods.
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.