| Title |
Longitudinal analysis of bone metabolism using SPECT/CT and 99mTc-diphosphono-propanedicarboxylic acid: comparison of visual and quantitative analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
EJNMMI Research, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13550-016-0217-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael Beck, James C. Sanders, Philipp Ritt, Julia Reinfelder, Torsten Kuwert |
| Abstract |
The therapy response of osseous metastases (OM) is commonly monitored by bone scintigraphies (BS). The aim of this study was to compare visual evaluation of changes in tracer uptake with quantitation in absolute units in OMs; 52 OMs from 19 patients who underwent BS with SPECT/CT at time points one and two (TP1/2) were analyzed retrospectively, with an average of 10.3 months between TP1 and 2. Tracer uptake in lesions was visually compared by two independent readers in both planar scintigraphies and SPECT/CT across both TPs and classified as regressive, stable, or progressive. Quantitative analysis was performed by measuring peak standardized uptake values (SUV). Based on quantitation, lesions were similarly classified as regressive (>30 % decrease), progressive (>30 % increase), or stable (rest). If available, uptake in reference regions in the lower thoracic or lumbar spine was used for normalization. In OMs at TP1 and TP2, mean SUVpeak (±SD) was found to be 20.4 (±20.8) and 16.4 (±11.5), respectively. For the reference region, mean SUVmean was 5.6 (±1.9) and 4.9 (±2.2). Agreement between quantitative and visual assessment was only moderate, with an average Cohen's kappa of 0.42 for planar scintigraphy and 0.62 for SPECT/CT. Discrepancies occurred in between 11 and 22 of the 52 lesions, depending on the reader and whether planar or SPECT imaging was considered. Compared to measuring uptake in absolute units, visual evaluation of skeletal scintigraphies for change in tumor metabolism yields inconsistent results in roughly one third of the cases. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 7 | 25% |
| Researcher | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 7 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 43% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 7% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 7% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 9 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 August 2016.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from EJNMMI Research
#442
of 612 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#338,047
of 380,129 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EJNMMI Research
#5
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 612 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 380,129 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.