| Title |
Optimal 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-galactose PET/CT protocol for detection of hepatocellular carcinoma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
EJNMMI Research, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13550-016-0206-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jacob Horsager, Kirstine Bak-Fredslund, Lars Peter Larsen, Gerda Elisabeth Villadsen, Trond Velde Bogsrud, Michael Sørensen |
| Abstract |
Positron emission tomography (PET) with the liver-specific galactose tracer 2-[(18)F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-galactose ((18)F-FDGal) may improve diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of this study was to test which of three different (18)F-FDGal PET protocols gives the highest tumour-to-background (T/B) ratio on PET images and thus better detection of HCC tumours. Ten patients with a total of 15 hepatic HCC tumours were enrolled prior to treatment. An experienced radiologist defined volumes of interest (VOIs) encircling HCC tumours on contrast-enhanced CT (ce-CT) images. Three PET/CT protocols were conducted following an intravenous (18)F-FDGal injection: (i) a 20-min dynamic PET/CT of the liver (to generate a 3D metabolic image), (ii) a traditional static whole-body PET/CT after 1 h, and (iii) a late static whole-body PET/CT after 2 or 3 h. PET images from each PET/CT protocol were fused with ce-CT images, and the average standardized uptake values (SUV) in tumour and background liver tissue were used to calculate (T/B) ratios. Furthermore, Tpeak/B ratios were calculated using the five hottest voxels in all hot tumours. The ratios for the three different PET protocols were compared. For the individual tumours, there was no significant difference in the T/B ratio between the three PET protocols. The metabolic image yielded higher Tpeak/B ratios than the two static images, but it was easier to identify tumours on the static images. One extrahepatic metastasis was detected. Neither metabolic images nor static whole-body images acquired 2 or 3 h after (18)F-FDGal injection offered an advantage to traditional whole-body PET/CT images acquired after 1 h for detection of HCC. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 27% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 33% |
| Psychology | 2 | 13% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 13% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 33% |
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 28 June 2016.
All research outputs
#21,766,037
of 24,288,533 outputs
Outputs from EJNMMI Research
#424
of 592 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#315,321
of 359,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EJNMMI Research
#9
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,288,533 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 592 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. 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 359,290 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 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.