ArticleEJNMMI research2025
Quantitative terbium-161 SPECT/CT imaging: demonstrating the feasibility of image-based dosimetry and highlighting pitfalls.
Article in EJNMMI research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- QuantitativeEJNMMI physics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTerbium-161 (
resultsOn average, the SPECT calibration factors (CFs) were 2-fold higher with ELEGP compared to MEGP and LEHR, and 3-fold higher at 49 keV compared to 75 keV. For each collimator, derived CFs varied substantially depending on measurement and volume-of-interest geometry-more so at 49 keV, compared to 75 keV. Measurements of two 3D-printed kidney inserts revealed superior visual image quality with LEHR compared to ELEGP and MEGP. Across all collimators, the 75 keV window provided better spatial resolution and contrast than the 49 keV window. An anthropomorphic phantom study, including a LungSpine phantom with 8 spherical inserts and 3 different background activity levels, demonstrated a greater quantitative accuracy for MEGP compared to LEHR and ELEGP, with statistical significance for both energy windows (p ≤ 0.001). Errors were generally larger at 49 keV compared to 75 keV. For the low-energy collimators, considerable septal penetration (e.g., at 292 and 475 keV) was observed, along with systematic underestimation at high activity levels.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that highly accurate SPECT/CT-based
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.