ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2026
Assessment of noninvasive quantification of [
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. 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.
- Quantification of [Frontiers in neuroscience · 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
55 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe suitability of the white matter centrum semiovale (CS) as a pseudo-reference region for simplified reference tissue model 2 (SRTM2) with [¹⁸F]SynVesT-1 PET has not been evaluated in youth cohorts. We aimed to assess noninvasive quantification methods and determine the minimum scan time needed in a sample of youth with mental health challenges.
methodsThirty-five youth participants (16–25 years old) from the Toronto Adolescent & Youth cohort underwent 120-minute scans with arterial sampling. Binding potential (BPND) was estimated using one-tissue compartment model (1TCM) as a reference method. The SRTM2 was then applied, with k2′ parameter either set to population average (k2 from 1TCM) or estimated individually by initial coupled fitting in a two-step procedure. Standardized uptake value ratio − 1 (SUVR − 1, 60–90 min) was compared with 1TCM-derived BPND. Linear regression and percent bias analyses were performed. Time stability was assessed using several truncated scans (40–100 min).
resultsCS volume (1.7 ± 0.2 mL), VT (4.0 ± 0.6 mL/cm3) and k2 (0.031 ± 0.004 min− 1) were consistent with previously reported values. The population-based k2′ (0.031) and SUVR − 1 closely matched 1TCM results (R2 > 0.9, < 5% mean bias). The coupled-k2′ approach underestimated several regions (R2 > 0.9, > 10% bias in some regions). Minimum scan durations were 60 min for 1TCM, 90 min for fixed-k2′, and ≥ 100 min for coupled-k2′.
conclusionThe population-based k2′ and semiquantitative SUVR–1 provide accurate [¹⁸F]SynVesT-1 quantification in youth with diverse clinical symptoms, supporting their use as noninvasive methods, and allowing scan time reduction to 90 minutes. This will facilitate its clinical use and wider applicability.
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.