↓ Skip to main content

Calibration of PET/CT scanners for multicenter studies on differentiated thyroid cancer with 124I

Overview of attention for article published in EJNMMI Research, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
Title
Calibration of PET/CT scanners for multicenter studies on differentiated thyroid cancer with 124I
Published in
EJNMMI Research, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13550-016-0191-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jakob W. Kist, Manfred van der Vlies, Otto S. Hoekstra, Henri N. J. M. Greuter, Bart de Keizer, Marcel P. M. Stokkel, Wouter V. Vogel, Marc C. Huisman, Arthur van Lingen

Abstract

Studies on imaging of differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) using (124)I often require a multicenter approach, as the prevalence of DTC is low. Calibration of participating scanners is required to obtain comparable quantification. As determination of a well-defined range of recovery coefficients is complicated for various reasons, a simpler approach based on the assumption that the iodine uptake is highly focal with a background that significantly lacks radioactivity might be more efficient. For each scanner, a linear conversion between known and observed activity can be derived, allowing quantification that can be traced to a common source for all scanners within one study-protocol. The aim of this paper is to outline a procedure using this approach in order to set up a multicenter calibration of PET/CT scanners for (124)I. A cylindrical polyethylene phantom contained six 2-ml vials with reference activities of ~2, 10, 20, 100, 400, and 2000 kBq, produced by dilution from a known activity. The phantom was scanned twice on PET/CT scanners of participating centers within 1 week. For each scanner, the best proportional and linear fit between measured and known activities were derived and based on statistical analyses of the results of all scanners; it was determined which fit should be applied. In addition, a Bland-Altman analysis was done on calibrated activities with respect to reference activities to asses the relative precision of the scanners. Nine Philips (vendor A) and nine Siemens (vendor B) PET/CT scanners were calibrated in a time period of 3 days before and after the reference time. No significant differences were detected between the two subsequent scans on any scanner. Six fitted intercepts of vendor A were significantly different from zero, so the linear model was used. Intercepts ranged from -8 to 26 kBq and slopes ranged from 0.80 to 0.98. Bland-Altman analysis of calibrated and reference activities showed that the relative error of calibrated activities was smaller than that of uncalibrated activities. A simplified multicenter calibration procedure for PET/CT scans that show highly focal uptake and negligible background is feasible and results in more precise quantification. Our procedure can be used in multicenter (124)I PET scans focusing on (recurrent) DTC.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 15%
Student > Bachelor 2 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 15%
Student > Master 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 31%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 8%
Physics and Astronomy 1 8%
Psychology 1 8%
Neuroscience 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 4 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 April 2016.
All research outputs
#14,258,962
of 22,865,319 outputs
Outputs from EJNMMI Research
#207
of 557 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,867
of 299,013 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EJNMMI Research
#5
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,865,319 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 557 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
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 299,013 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.