ArticleThe British journal of radiology2023
Image-mode performance characterisation of a positron emission tomography subsystem designed for Biology-guided radiotherapy (BgRT).
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Time-resolved PET imaging using a joint dynamic reconstruction and motion estimation framework (DREME-PET).Medical physics · 2026Article
- Article
- Imaging Biomarkers in Radiotherapy.Cancers · 2026Review
- A Clinical Workflow for Evaluating Dose to Organs at Risk After Biology-Guided Radiation Therapy Delivery.Cancers · 2025Article
- A Prospective First-In-Human Pilot StudyAdvances in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Survey and profile data on particle therapy technology in Japan.Japanese journal of radiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Strategies for Offline Adaptive Biology-Guided Radiotherapy (BgRT) on a PET-Linac Platform.Cancers · 2025Article
- Innovative approaches in precision radiation oncology: advanced imaging technologies and challenges which shape the future of radiation therapy.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- First-Year Experience of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy/Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Treatment Using a Novel Biology-Guided Radiation Therapy Machine.Advances in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Preclinical Evaluation ofInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2023Article
- Evaluation of fan-beam kilovoltage computed tomography image quality on a novel biological-guided radiotherapy platform.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2023Article
- The potential of biology-guided radiation therapy in thoracic cancer: A preliminary treatment planning study.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- An Investigation into Planned Dose Preservation of Biology-guided Radiotherapy Under Various Radiopharmaceutical Uptake Conditions.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
- IMRT and SBRT Treatment Planning Study for the First Clinical Biology-Guided Radiotherapy System.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
- Mitigation of Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy and Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Treatment Planning Errors on the Novel RefleXion X1 System Using Failure Mode and Effect Analysis Within Six Sigma Framework.Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
- Recent Advances and Challenges in Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesIn this study, we characterise the imaging-mode performance of the positron emission tomography (PET) subsystem of the RefleXion X1 machine using the NEMA NU-2 2018 standard.
methodsThe X1 machine consists of two symmetrically opposing 90
resultsPET subsystem sensitivity was measured as 0.183 and 0.161 cps/kBq at the center and off-center positions, respectively. Spatial resolution: average FWHM values of 4.3, 5.1, and 6.7 mm for the point sources at 1, 10, and 20 cm off center, respectively were recorded. For count loss, max NECR: 2.63 kcps, max true coincidence rate: 5.56 kcps, and scatter fraction: 39.8%. The 10 mm sphere was not visible. Image-quality contrast values were: 29.6%, 64.9%, 66.5%, 81.8%, 81.2%, and background variability: 14.8%, 12.4%, 10.3%, 8.8%, 8.3%, for the 13, 17, 22, 28, 37 mm sphere sizes, respectively.
conclusionsWhen operating in an imaging mode, the spatial resolution and image contrast of the X1 PET subsystem were comparable to those of typical diagnostic imaging systems for large spheres, while the sensitivity and count rate were lower due to the significantly smaller PET detector area in the X1 system. Clinical efficacy when used in BgRT remains to be validated. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is the first performance evaluation of the PET subsystem on the novel BgRT machine. The dual arcs rotating PET subsystem on RefleXion X1 machine performance is comparable to those of the typical diagnostic PET system based on the spatial resolution and image contrast for larger spheres.
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.