ArticleEJNMMI research2019
Interobserver variability of image-derived arterial blood SUV in whole-body FDG PET.
Article in EJNMMI research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Repeatability of metabolic tumor burden and lesion glycolysis between clinical readers.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- Radioembolization-Induced Changes in Hepatic [Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- A convolutional neural network for fully automated blood SUV determination to facilitate SUR computation in oncological FDG-PET.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2021Article
- Reliable quantification ofEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundToday, the standardized uptake value (SUV) is essentially the only means for quantitative evaluation of static [
methodsFDG PET/CT scans from 83 patients (72 male, 11 female) with non-small cell lung cancer (N = 46) or head and neck cancer (N = 37) were included. BSUV was determined by 8 individuals, each applying a dedicated delineation tool for the BSUV determination in the aorta. Two of the observers applied two further tools. Altogether, five different delineation tools were used. With each used tool, delineation was performed for the whole patient group, resulting in 12 distinct observations per patient. Intersubject variability of BSUV determination was assessed using the fractional deviations for the individual patients from the patient group average and was quantified as standard deviation (SD
resultsInterobserver variability in the pooled data amounts to RMS = 2.8% and is much smaller than the intersubject variability of BSUV (SD
conclusionThe present investigation demonstrates that the image-based manual determination of BSUV in the aorta is sufficiently reproducible across different observers and delineation tools which is a prerequisite for accurate SUR determination. This finding is in line with the already demonstrated superior prognostic value of SUR in comparison to SUV in the first clinical studies.
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.