320 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26219870)
1. Harmonizing FDG PET quantification while maintaining optimal lesion detection: prospective multicentre validation in 517 oncology patients.
Quak E; Le Roux PY; Hofman MS; Robin P; Bourhis D; Callahan J; Binns D; Desmonts C; Salaun PY; Hicks RJ; Aide N
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2015 Dec; 42(13):2072-82. PubMed ID: 26219870
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Generating harmonized SUV within the EANM EARL accreditation program: software approach versus EARL-compliant reconstruction.
Lasnon C; Salomon T; Desmonts C; Dô P; Oulkhouir Y; Madelaine J; Aide N
Ann Nucl Med; 2017 Feb; 31(2):125-134. PubMed ID: 27812791
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Harmonizing SUVs in multicentre trials when using different generation PET systems: prospective validation in non-small cell lung cancer patients.
Lasnon C; Desmonts C; Quak E; Gervais R; Do P; Dubos-Arvis C; Aide N
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2013 Jul; 40(7):985-96. PubMed ID: 23564036
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Does PET SUV Harmonization Affect PERCIST Response Classification?
Quak E; Le Roux PY; Lasnon C; Robin P; Hofman MS; Bourhis D; Callahan J; Binns DS; Desmonts C; Salaun PY; Hicks RJ; Aide N
J Nucl Med; 2016 Nov; 57(11):1699-1706. PubMed ID: 27283930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Using EQ·PET to reduce reconstruction-dependent variations in [
Vanhoutte M; Semah F; Lopes R; Jaillard A; Petyt G; Aziz AL; Lahousse H; Declerck J; Pasquier F; Spottiswoode B; Fahmi R
Phys Med Biol; 2019 Aug; 64(17):175002. PubMed ID: 31344691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Why harmonization is needed when using FDG PET/CT as a prognosticator: demonstration with EARL-compliant SUV as an independent prognostic factor in lung cancer.
Houdu B; Lasnon C; Licaj I; Thomas G; Do P; Guizard AV; Desmonts C; Aide N
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2019 Feb; 46(2):421-428. PubMed ID: 30218317
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. The value of Bayesian penalized likelihood reconstruction for improving lesion conspicuity of malignant lung tumors on
Kurita Y; Ichikawa Y; Nakanishi T; Tomita Y; Hasegawa D; Murashima S; Hirano T; Sakuma H
Ann Nucl Med; 2020 Apr; 34(4):272-279. PubMed ID: 32060780
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. SUV Harmonization Between Different Hybrid PET/CT Systems.
Rubello D; Colletti PM
Clin Nucl Med; 2018 Nov; 43(11):811-814. PubMed ID: 30199381
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Impact of Point-Spread Function Modeling on PET Image Quality in Integrated PET/MR Hybrid Imaging.
Aklan B; Oehmigen M; Beiderwellen K; Ruhlmann M; Paulus DH; Jakoby BW; Ritt P; Quick HH
J Nucl Med; 2016 Jan; 57(1):78-84. PubMed ID: 26471697
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. How to harmonize SUVs obtained by hybrid PET/CT scanners with and without point spread function correction.
Ferretti A; Chondrogiannis S; Rampin L; Bellan E; Marzola MC; Grassetto G; Gusella S; Maffione AM; Gava M; Rubello D
Phys Med Biol; 2018 Nov; 63(23):235010. PubMed ID: 30474620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Protocols for Harmonized Quantification and Noise Reduction in Low-Dose Oncologic
Machado MAD; Menezes VO; Namías M; Vieira NS; Queiroz CC; Matheoud R; Alessio AM; Oliveira ML
J Nucl Med Technol; 2019 Mar; 47(1):47-54. PubMed ID: 30076252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Impact of point spread function modelling and time of flight on FDG uptake measurements in lung lesions using alternative filtering strategies.
Armstrong IS; Kelly MD; Williams HA; Matthews JC
EJNMMI Phys; 2014 Dec; 1(1):99. PubMed ID: 26501457
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Clinical evaluation of whole-body oncologic PET with time-of-flight and point-spread function for the hybrid PET/MR system.
Shang K; Cui B; Ma J; Shuai D; Liang Z; Jansen F; Zhou Y; Lu J; Zhao G
Eur J Radiol; 2017 Aug; 93():70-75. PubMed ID: 28668434
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Improvement in PET/CT image quality with a combination of point-spread function and time-of-flight in relation to reconstruction parameters.
Akamatsu G; Ishikawa K; Mitsumoto K; Taniguchi T; Ohya N; Baba S; Abe K; Sasaki M
J Nucl Med; 2012 Nov; 53(11):1716-22. PubMed ID: 22952340
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16.
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]
17. Influences of point-spread function and time-of-flight reconstructions on standardized uptake value of lymph node metastases in FDG-PET.
Akamatsu G; Mitsumoto K; Taniguchi T; Tsutsui Y; Baba S; Sasaki M
Eur J Radiol; 2014 Jan; 83(1):226-30. PubMed ID: 24144448
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Impact of time of flight and point spread function on quantitative parameters of lung lesions in
Huang K; Feng Y; Liang W; Li L
BMC Med Imaging; 2021 Nov; 21(1):169. PubMed ID: 34773998
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The association of tumor-to-background ratios and SUVmax deviations related to point spread function and time-of-flight F18-FDG-PET/CT reconstruction in colorectal liver metastases.
Rogasch JM; Steffen IG; Hofheinz F; Großer OS; Furth C; Mohnike K; Hass P; Walke M; Apostolova I; Amthauer H
EJNMMI Res; 2015; 5():31. PubMed ID: 25992306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluation of strategies towards harmonization of FDG PET/CT studies in multicentre trials: comparison of scanner validation phantoms and data analysis procedures.
Makris NE; Huisman MC; Kinahan PE; Lammertsma AA; Boellaard R
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2013 Oct; 40(10):1507-15. PubMed ID: 23754762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
