Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36335130›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

An image registration method for voxel-wise analysis of whole-body oncological PET-CT.

Hanna Jönsson, Simon Ekström, Robin Strand, Mette A Pedersen, Daniel Molin, Håkan Ahlström, Joel Kullberg

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. coPERCIST: AI-assisted PET-CT response assessment.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. A whole-body diffusion MRI normal atlas: development, evaluation and initial use.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2023
    Article
  17. Review
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Hanna JönssonSection of Radiology, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, 751 85, Uppsala, Sweden. hanna.jonsson@surgsci.uu.se.
Simon EkströmSection of Radiology, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, 751 85, Uppsala, Sweden.
Robin StrandSection of Radiology, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, 751 85, Uppsala, Sweden.
Mette A PedersenDepartment of Nuclear Medicine & PET-Centre, Aarhus University Hospital, 8200, Aarhus N, Denmark.
Daniel MolinDepartment of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, 751 85, Uppsala, Sweden.
Håkan AhlströmSection of Radiology, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, 751 85, Uppsala, Sweden.
Joel KullbergSection of Radiology, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, 751 85, Uppsala, Sweden.
Uppsala University · SEAarhus University Hospital · DKAntaros Medical (Sweden) · SE

Funding

The Swedish Cancer Society 20 1303 PJF 01 H
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Whole-body positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) imaging in oncology provides comprehensive information of each patient's disease status. However, image interpretation of volumetric data is a complex and time-consuming task. In this work, an image registration method targeted towards computer-aided voxel-wise analysis of whole-body PET-CT data was developed. The method used both CT images and tissue segmentation masks in parallel to spatially align images step-by-step. To evaluate its performance, a set of baseline PET-CT images of 131 classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) patients and longitudinal image series of 135 head and neck cancer (HNC) patients were registered between and within subjects according to the proposed method. Results showed that major organs and anatomical structures generally were registered correctly. Whole-body inverse consistency vector and intensity magnitude errors were on average less than 5 mm and 45 Hounsfield units respectively in both registration tasks. Image registration was feasible in time and the nearly automatic pipeline enabled efficient image processing. Metabolic tumor volumes of the cHL patients and registration-derived therapy-related tissue volume change of the HNC patients mapped to template spaces confirmed proof-of-concept. In conclusion, the method established a robust point-correspondence and enabled quantitative visualization of group-wise image features on voxel level.

Indexed as

Positron-Emission TomographyPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyAlgorithmsHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedTumor Burden

Identifiers

PMID36335130
PMCPMC9637131
OpenAlexW4308307396

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.