ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2026
coPERCIST: AI-assisted PET-CT response assessment.
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeThe PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumours (PERCIST) 1.0 provides a standardized framework for evaluating treatment response using [
methodscoPERCIST performs organ segmentation and automates key steps of the PERCIST workflow, including background activity quantification, lesion detection, SULpeak calculation, and longitudinal lesion comparison. A novel image alignment method using organ-specific transformations and uncertainty estimation enables accurate lesion tracking over time. The system was evaluated in 58 oncological patients, each with two PET-CT scans. Up to three measurable lesions per patient were analysed.
resultsThe AI-suggested liver and aorta volume of interest for threshold calculation were correct in all baseline and follow-up studies. Follow-up studies were classified as progressive metabolic disease (PMD) in 38 cases, stable metabolic disease (SMD) in 16, and partial metabolic response (PMR) in 4. Of 130 lesions evaluated, anatomical alignment was accurate in all cases, and pairwise SULpeak quantification was accurate in 95%. Pairwise SULpeak quantification failed in seven lesion pairs due to proximity to other lesions or misclassified physiological uptake. Review time was less than one minute for most cases.
conclusionThis study demonstrates the feasibility of AI-assisted PERCIST evaluation for [
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.