ArticleJapanese journal of radiology2026
Sequential scans of
Article in Japanese journal of radiology, 2026. 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.
- Brain PET in the era of anti-amyloid-β antibody therapy for Alzheimer disease.Japanese journal of radiology · 2026Review
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
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to compare visual and quantitative assessments between PET/CT at 90 min and sequential PET/MRI at approximately 120 min after injection of MATERIALS AND
methodsEighty-three participants underwent both PET/CT and sequential PET/MRI. Two nuclear medicine physicians performed visual interpretations. SUVr was calculated using four reference regions-pons, whole cerebellum, cerebellar gray matter (CGM), and whole cerebellum and brainstem-and compared between PET/CT and PET/MRI. Centiloid Scale was also compared between PET/CT and PET/MRI. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on Centiloid scale. Associations between scan interval, age, and amyloid burden were evaluated using stepwise regression. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers were compared with imaging findings in 52 participants. Additionally, six participants underwent dynamic PET/MRI at 0, 60, 90, and 120 min post-injection.
resultsVisual interpretation showed high agreement between PET/CT and PET/MRI (κ = 0.97), and 98% concordance with CSF findings. SUVr and Centiloid scale demonstrated a strong intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.96-0.98. However, SUVr and Centiloid scale were significantly higher from PET/CT than from PET/MRI, except for SUVr using CGM. Age and Centiloid scale were significant predictors of modality differences. Scan interval was also significant when CGM was used as the reference region. Dynamic PET/MRI revealed time-dependent increases in Centiloid scale among amyloid-positive participants. High concordance in visual and quantitative assessments was seen 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.