| Title |
18F-fluoride-PET for dynamic in vivo monitoring of bone formation in multiple myeloma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
EJNMMI Research, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13550-016-0197-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J. C. Regelink, P. G. Raijmakers, N. Bravenboer, R. Milek, N. J. Hoetjes, A. M. de Kreuk, M. van Duin, M. J. Wondergem, P. Lips, P. Sonneveld, J. M. Zijlstra, S. Zweegman |
| Abstract |
Bone disease in multiple myeloma is characterized by reduced bone formation. The gold standard of bone formation is the mineral apposition rate (MAR), an invasive technique reflecting bone formation at a single site. We compared (18)F-fluoride-PET with the MAR in myeloma patients. Bone formation was measured before and after bortezomib treatment by determination of the MAR in iliac bone marrow biopsies and the measurement of (18)F-uptake. The inter- and intra-individual variations in (18)F-uptake (SUVA50%) were pronounced as 33.50 (range 4.42 to 37.92) and 27.18 (range 4.00 to 31.18), respectively. A significant correlation between the MAR and (18)F-uptake was found (r = 0.80, p = 0.017). There was a heterogeneous response after treatment varying from -2.20 to 4.53. Iliac (18)F-uptake was associated with the local MAR in myeloma patients. Furthermore, (18)F-fluoride-PET demonstrated the heterogeneity of in vivo bone formation, enabling monitoring during treatment. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 16 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 3 | 19% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 50% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 6% |
| Engineering | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
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 01 October 2016.
All research outputs
#18,464,797
of 22,879,161 outputs
Outputs from EJNMMI Research
#337
of 558 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,573
of 338,931 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EJNMMI Research
#13
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,879,161 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 558 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 338,931 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.