Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32095919›Full record

ArticleEJNMMI research2020

Optimization of PET protocol and interrater reliability of

Sarah Piron, Kathia De Man, Vanessa Schelfhout, Nick Van Laeken, Ken Kersemans, Eric Achten, Filip De Vos, Piet Ost

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EJNMMI research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03573011 (PSMA-PET/CT for Prostate Cancer - Phase 2 Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT03573011 phase2completednot on this map

PSMA-PET/CT for Prostate Cancer - Phase 2 Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Hospital, GhentRan2018 to 2019Enrolled64ConditionsProstate CancerArms[18F]PSMA-11
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Comparison of early and standardAnnals of nuclear medicine · 2025
    Article
  6. Preclinical comparative study of [Scientific reports · 2022
    Article
  7. Review
  8. The aluminium-[EJNMMI radiopharmacy and chemistry · 2021
    Review
  9. Intra-individual dynamic comparison ofScientific reports · 2020
    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

8 authors.

Sarah PironLaboratory of Radiopharmacy, Ghent University, Ottergemsesteenweg 460, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. sarah.piron@ugent.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5543-7678
Kathia De ManDepartment Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Vanessa SchelfhoutDepartment Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Nick Van LaekenDepartment Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Ken KersemansDepartment Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Eric AchtenDepartment Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Filip De VosLaboratory of Radiopharmacy, Ghent University, Ottergemsesteenweg 460, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Piet OstDepartment Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.

Funding

Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek TBM T001517
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSeveral scan parameters for PET imaging with

resultsThe 4 MBq/kg group received for all reconstructed images (60 min p.i., 1.5 and 3 min/bed position and 180 min p.i., 1.5 and 3 min/bed position) the highest median image quality score compared to the 2 MBq/kg group (p values < 0.01). When comparing all reconstructed images, the highest image quality score was given to images at 60 min p.i., 3 min/bed position for both dosage groups (score 5 and 6 for 2 and 4 MBq/kg, respectively). The addition of furosemide administration decreased the interference score with one point (p = 0.01106) and facilitated the evaluation of lesions in proximity to the ureters. The interrater reliability for the comparison of each lesion separately after more than 40

conclusionAlthough the results indicate an administered activity of 4.0 ± 0.4 MBq/kg, preference will be given to 2.0 ± 0.2 MBq/kg due to the small difference in absolute score (max 1 point) and the ALARA principle. For evaluation of lesions in proximity to the ureters, the co-administration of a diuretic can be useful. The increase of the κ value from 0.78 to 0.94 suggests a learning curve in the interpretation of

trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, NCT03573011. Retrospectively registered 28 June 2018.

Indexed as

18F-PSMA-11Acquisition timeInterrater reliabilityPET/CTProstate cancerPSMARandomized clinical trialScan protocol

Identifiers

PMID32095919
PMCPMC7040121

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.