Should we assess repeatability of PET quantitative uptake measurements of each 18F-labelled tracer?

  • Eric Laffon
  • Henri de Clermont
  • Sébastien Buj
  • Roger Marthan
Letter to the Editor
  • 5 Downloads

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

None.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

Not applicable.

Informed consent

Not applicable.

References

  1. 1.
    Kramer GM, Liu Y, de Langen AJ, Jansma EP, Trigonis I, Asselin MC, et al. Repeatability of quantitative 18F-FLT uptake measurements in solid tumors: an individual patient data multi-center meta-analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3923-x.
  2. 2.
    Boellaard R. Standards for PET image acquisition and quantitative data analysis. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:11S–20S.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Laffon E, de Clermont H, Marthan R, Paycha F. On the 18F-fluoride PET imaging quantification to predict 223Ra-dichloride treatment response. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;45:318–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kramer GM, Hoekstra OS, Boellaard R. Reply: Repeatability of quantitative whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT uptake measures in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: dynamic versus test-retest design. J Nucl Med. 2017;58:1528–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Laffon E, Marthan R. Repeatability of quantitative whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT uptake measures in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: dynamic versus test-retest design. J Nucl Med. 2017;58:1528.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CHU de BordeauxBordeauxFrance
  2. 2.Univ. BordeauxCentre de Recherche Cardio-Thoracique de BordeauxBordeauxFrance
  3. 3.INSERM U-1045Centre de Recherche Cardio-Thoracique de BordeauxBordeauxFrance
  4. 4.Service de Médecine NucléaireHôpital du Haut-LévèquePessacFrance

Personalised recommendations