Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36757516›Full record

ArticleEJNMMI physics2023

Investigation of image-based lesion and kidney dosimetry protocols for

Sandra Resch, Sarah Takayama Fouladgar, Mathias Zacherl, Gabriel T Sheikh, Grigory Liubchenko, Mikhail Rumiantcev, Lena M Unterrainer, Vera Wenter, Peter Bartenstein, Sibylle I Ziegler and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EJNMMI physics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Dosimetry of [Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Metformin and renal dosimetry in patients undergoing [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Effects of androgen receptor signaling inhibitors on absorbed doses in mCRPC patients undergoing [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Article
  5. Quantitative accuracy ofEJNMMI physics · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Fast [EJNMMI physics · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Mathematic Modeling of Tumor Growth During [Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Impact of the Reference Multiple-Time-Point Dosimetry Protocol on the Validity of Single-Time-Point Dosimetry for [Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2024
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. QuantitativeEJNMMI physics · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

14 authors.

Sandra ReschDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany. sandra.resch@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Sarah Takayama FouladgarDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Mathias ZacherlDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Gabriel T SheikhDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Grigory LiubchenkoDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Mikhail RumiantcevDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Lena M UnterrainerDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Vera WenterDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Peter BartensteinDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Sibylle I ZieglerDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Harun IlhanDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Leonie BeyerDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Guido BöningDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Astrid DelkerDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMATERIALS AND

methodsIn total, 43 lesions and 10 kidneys of 5 patients receiving

resultsThe best-fit function was found to be a mono-exponential model for lesions and a bi-exponential model with a population-based parameter and two free parameters for kidneys. The BEDs calculated with the time sampling 1, 3, 7 days showed the lowest deviations from the reference for lesions with 4 ± 5%. Without day 7, still 86% of all lesions showed deviations from the reference < 10%. The outlier deviations showed a positive correlation with the effective half-life of the respective lesions. For kidneys, including days 1, 2, 3 achieved the best results with 0 ± 1%. Generally, deviations for kidneys were found to be small for all time samplings (max. 13%).

conclusionsFor combined optimization of the SPECT/CT time sampling for kidney and lesion dosimetry during

Indexed as

177LuDosimetryProstate cancerPSMASPECT

Identifiers

PMID36757516
PMCPMC9911578

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.