ArticleJournal of medical physics
Comparative Study on Effective Dose and Cancer Risk in Dual-tracer Hybrid Imaging - International Commission on Radiological Protection and Personalized Models.
Article in Journal of medical physics. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Dual-tracer hybrid imaging is used for concurrent evaluation of two distinct molecular biomarkers, enhancing diagnostic capabilities. However, concerns about increased radiation exposure to patients arise with this technique. This study investigates the representative radiation doses and cancer risks associated with dual-tracer imaging and explores personalized dosimetry approaches. Materials and Methods: A literature-based protocol identification was performed to obtain the required dosimetric inputs. Dose coefficients were applied to convert tracer activities into effective dose estimates. Internal dose assessments using reference phantom models were compared with personalized dosimetry results obtained through GATE-based Monte Carlo simulations specific to dual-tracer positron emission tomography. In addition, complementary computed tomography (CT) imaging was performed, and cancer risks were quantified using the BEIR VII risk model. Results: Whole-body CT dose estimates closely matched those from the MIRDct tool, with a maximum discrepancy of 9.2%. Among the tracers evaluated, Conclusions: The study emphasizes the importance of addressing increased radiation doses and harmonizing dual-tracer hybrid imaging protocols. Personalized dosimetry enhances patient-specific risk assessments and safety by providing more accurate estimates of radiation exposure and associated cancer risks.
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.