68 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21331942)
21. Whole-Body [18F]-FDG-PET/MRI for Oncology: A Consensus Recommendation.
Umutlu L; Beyer T; Grueneisen JS; Rischpler C; Quick HH; Veit-Haibach P; Eiber M; Purz S; Antoch G; Gatidis S; Nikolaou K; Schaefer JF; Rausch I; Herrmann K; ;
Rofo; 2019 Apr; 191(4):289-297. PubMed ID: 30818411
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Retrospective quality control review of FDG scans in the imaging sub-study of PALETTE EORTC 62072/VEG110727: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial.
Hristova I; Boellaard R; Vogel W; Mottaghy F; Marreaud S; Collette S; Schöffski P; Sanfilippo R; Dewji R; van der Graaf W; Oyen WJ
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2015 May; 42(6):848-57. PubMed ID: 25711176
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Design considerations for using PET as a response measure in single site and multicenter clinical trials.
Doot RK; Kurland BF; Kinahan PE; Mankoff DA
Acad Radiol; 2012 Feb; 19(2):184-90. PubMed ID: 22104290
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. In vivo imaging of oligonucleotidic aptamers.
Tavitian B; Ducongé F; Boisgard R; Dollé F
Methods Mol Biol; 2009; 535():241-59. PubMed ID: 19377991
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Variability of [18F]FDG administered activities among patients undergoing PET examinations: an international multicenter survey.
Del Sole A; Lecchi M; Lucignani G
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2016 Mar; 168(3):337-42. PubMed ID: 25994847
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Guest Editorial: new PET radiopharmaceuticals as molecular imaging probes.
Vallabhajosula S
Semin Nucl Med; 2011 Jul; 41(4):244-5. PubMed ID: 21624559
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. New Challenges for PET Image Reconstruction for Total-Body Imaging.
Efthimiou N
PET Clin; 2020 Oct; 15(4):453-461. PubMed ID: 32739048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. A simple test to determine the quality of your clinical PET images.
Dobbeleir A; Ham H; Goethals I; Keppens J; D'Asseler Y; Van de Wiele C
Ann Nucl Med; 2010 Dec; 24(10):751-7. PubMed ID: 20824396
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. An account of data entry inconsistencies and their impact on positron emission tomography quantification.
Nguyen T; Baun C; Høilund-Carlsen PF
Medicine (Baltimore); 2018 Sep; 97(37):e12312. PubMed ID: 30212971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. 3D/4D Reconstruction and Quantitative Total Body Imaging.
Qi J; Matej S; Wang G; Zhang X
PET Clin; 2021 Jan; 16(1):41-54. PubMed ID: 33218603
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. [Whole body PET imaging standardizations for the multi-center trials of the JSRT Research Group].
Matsumoto K
Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2009 May; 65(5):668-80. PubMed ID: 19498257
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. A review of harmonization strategies for quantitative PET.
Akamatsu G; Tsutsui Y; Daisaki H; Mitsumoto K; Baba S; Sasaki M
Ann Nucl Med; 2023 Feb; 37(2):71-88. PubMed ID: 36607466
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Multicenter survey of PET/CT protocol parameters that affect standardized uptake values.
Byrd D; Christopfel R; Buatti J; Moros E; Nehmeh S; Opanowski A; Kinahan P
J Med Imaging (Bellingham); 2018 Jan; 5(1):011012. PubMed ID: 29250567
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. PET systems: the value of added length.
Borasi G; Fioroni F; Del Guerra A; Lucignani G
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2010 Aug; 37(9):1629-32. PubMed ID: 20339845
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Suboptimal and inadequate quantification: an alarming crisis in medical applications of PET.
Basu S; Kwee TC; Torigian D; Saboury B; Alavi A
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2011 Jul; 38(7):1381-2. PubMed ID: 21424260
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. GMP--three letters with many interpretations. Protection of patients or killing the clinical and research applications of PET?
Långström B; Hartvig P
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2008 Apr; 35(4):693-4. PubMed ID: 18157532
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. EANM/EARL harmonization strategies in PET quantification: from daily practice to multicentre oncological studies.
Aide N; Lasnon C; Veit-Haibach P; Sera T; Sattler B; Boellaard R
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2017 Aug; 44(Suppl 1):17-31. PubMed ID: 28623376
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. EORTC PET response criteria are more influenced by reconstruction inconsistencies than PERCIST but both benefit from the EARL harmonization program.
Lasnon C; Quak E; Le Roux PY; Robin P; Hofman MS; Bourhis D; Callahan J; Binns DS; Desmonts C; Salaun PY; Hicks RJ; Aide N
EJNMMI Phys; 2017 Dec; 4(1):17. PubMed ID: 28560574
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. The Strategies to Homogenize PET/CT Metrics: The Case of Onco-Haematological Clinical Trials.
Chauvie S; Bergesio F
Biomedicines; 2016 Nov; 4(4):. PubMed ID: 28536393
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40.
Lasnon C; Majdoub M; Lavigne B; Do P; Madelaine J; Visvikis D; Hatt M; Aide N
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2016 Dec; 43(13):2324-2335. PubMed ID: 27325312
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
