Impact of the definition of peak standardized uptake value on quantification of treatment response.
about
DICOM for quantitative imaging biomarker development: a standards based approach to sharing clinical data and structured PET/CT analysis results in head and neck cancer researchPrognostic significance of volume-based PET parameters in cancer patients.State-Of-The-Art and Recent Advances in Quantification for Therapeutic Follow-Up in Oncology Using PETThe effect of volume of interest definition on quantification of lymph node immune response to a monkeypox virus infection assessed by (18)F-FDG-PET.Evaluation of strategies towards harmonization of FDG PET/CT studies in multicentre trials: comparison of scanner validation phantoms and data analysis procedures.FDG-PET imaging in mild traumatic brain injury: a critical review.Assessment of interpatient heterogeneity in tumor radiosensitivity for nonsmall cell lung cancer using tumor-volume variation data.Volumetric FDG-PET predicts overall and progression- free survival after 14 days of targeted therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.The emerging science of quantitative imaging biomarkers terminology and definitions for scientific studies and regulatory submissions.Prognostic value of metabolic metrics extracted from baseline positron emission tomography images in non-small cell lung cancer.For avid glucose tumors, the SUV peak is the most reliable parameter for [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT quantification, regardless of acquisition time.Preoperative Volume-Based PET Parameter, MTV2.5, as a Potential Surrogate Marker for Tumor Biology and Recurrence in Resected Pancreatic Cancer.Scanning linear estimation: improvements over region of interest (ROI) methods.Quantitative Evaluation of Therapeutic Response by FDG-PET-CT in Metastatic Breast CancerHarmonizing SUVs in multicentre trials when using different generation PET systems: prospective validation in non-small cell lung cancer patients.Prediction of survival by [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer undergoing definitive chemoradiation therapy: results of the ACRIN 6668/RTOG 0235 trial.Tumor quantification in clinical positron emission tomography.3D absorbed dose distribution estimated by Monte Carlo simulation in radionuclide therapy with a monoclonal antibody targeting synovial sarcoma.A Computer-Aided Analysis Method of SPECT Brain Images for Quantitative Treatment Monitoring: Performance Evaluations and Clinical Applications.FLT PET-CT in evaluation of treatment response.Elevated tumor-to-liver uptake ratio (TLR) from (18)F-FDG-PET/CT predicts poor prognosis in stage IIA colorectal cancer following curative resection.Verification of the tumor volume delineation method using a fixed threshold of peak standardized uptake value.Classification and evaluation strategies of auto-segmentation approaches for PET: Report of AAPM task group No. 211.Prognostic significance of clinical and 18 F-FDG PET/CT parameters for post-distant metastasis survival in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients.The age of reason for FDG PET image-derived indices.Statistical assessment of treatment response in a cancer patient based on pre-therapy and post-therapy FDG-PET scans.Effects of ROI Placement on PET-Based Assessment of Tumor Response to Therapy.Optimizing an 18F-NaF and 18F-FDG cocktail for PET assessment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.A prospective cohort study to assess the role of FDG-PET in differentiating benign and malignant follicular neoplasms.¹⁸F-FDG PET SUVmax as an indicator of histopathologic response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in extremity osteosarcoma.Area under the cumulative SUV-volume histogram is not a viable metric of intratumoral metabolic heterogeneity.Prognostic value of volumetric parameters measured by 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.Effect of Time-of-Flight and Regularized Reconstructions on Quantitative Measurements and Qualitative Assessments in Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer With 18F-Fluorocholine Dual Time Point PET/MRI.Initial FDG-PET/CT predicts survival in adults Ewing sarcoma family of tumors.Towards enhanced PET quantification in clinical oncology.Quantitation of Cancer Treatment Response by 18F-FDG PET/CT: Multicenter Assessment of Measurement Variability.Application of partial volume effect correction and 4D PET in the quantification of FDG avid lung lesions.Prognostic Value of Pre- and Post-Treatment FDG PET/CT Parameters in Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients.Current Methods to Define Metabolic Tumor Volume in Positron Emission Tomography: Which One is Better?What Do We Measure in Oncology PET?
P2860
Q24658635-81BF0C2B-9019-47EB-8DCF-BCAF8E1C4EDBQ27687836-40992DF1-644B-4FA1-AE69-DDE18F82905EQ27694674-8228F4AA-1554-402B-B1AB-449043D5F9D3Q28646230-E2B77E1A-7620-46B9-84DC-8974545C5794Q30645097-0F68044D-E1FE-4F39-B2F2-BADC1EDC68EAQ30730474-082D018C-6250-4C7C-9275-9E502F98CF00Q30827730-04B2E334-4C1B-431E-9589-CA19E6E056ECQ33780956-55233D90-43BE-4BE7-A2E0-EB74EEA76A1AQ34424266-603D587B-34FF-4C2C-9D88-F1DAF2AA97AAQ35731341-EDBFE35A-6581-4A89-BBB6-866398976307Q36653868-26612B87-B7DA-4A57-B51A-42810F9ECBAFQ36663805-A00AFF35-DBF9-4DFD-AF73-4D2E71888028Q36731371-C9691DA0-6C43-48CD-BED9-E0BE1CD8EAF0Q36883389-B05FCA01-B82C-4F73-B891-8F6DF7E424F2Q36920672-9491F19E-A1BE-4FD2-8160-110360AA9CA7Q37227687-9F637868-8C86-45FA-B2D4-C0F3E1654FC3Q37342658-5A537A1B-35DB-42A5-A412-B48E3C23E398Q37590988-CF09A433-1B97-46CD-AD69-41997908EF41Q37640134-8B72C065-5AE6-49D1-957A-23A77226BC57Q38206772-EBADC0B7-3E01-489E-9D1F-0146A0F2BABFQ38622719-65BC77F6-AF50-4651-A9D9-6D9FB7EFAEAEQ38693731-5B76237D-68A6-43D6-BBAD-546609E83795Q38766127-9759D4F0-B7CC-488A-80FE-95EFE257D616Q38803920-3AD1E099-71E3-435C-A629-D8F8A072E7EBQ39065889-0034C183-EB02-4CD6-B152-4C316115AAEFQ39089986-0B01E595-71D2-408C-A22C-2509FA46A1BBQ39245990-4A02BA0F-D5C6-4C4A-95FC-1430BFB62194Q42095619-1FC07341-2947-480C-9F64-3ED5B122773CQ42368768-D6EA455B-4F84-4EFE-AE7B-B4BE07D56FDFQ44090756-1A6791EA-DBC2-47E9-A8F9-C1C3BF2CB9FEQ44552002-2BA02E1E-01D1-43F0-BB6E-AF8E06707A2FQ46284024-84927283-BDF2-4A39-85C5-CD8D12D72288Q46423605-D84C02BB-6BBA-4875-BB98-B80DA19B01A2Q47119469-A270E0FB-6A03-409A-B9C0-CD6D06006C13Q47823973-5E61DFD2-3696-4219-9739-FBAC484B2CAAQ48673112-C851E385-0499-4D21-A6C0-AA7837280C7DQ48841044-2C4791DC-7E92-4CF0-AC4F-7371E8907594Q49386815-98192DC5-5A02-45F7-B922-FC42E0AC3B75Q49386829-38CC4527-0DF3-4656-A216-0EE33A763525Q50211384-028376C5-0AF0-4256-9D4A-88866ED99C59
P2860
Impact of the definition of peak standardized uptake value on quantification of treatment response.
description
2012 nî lūn-bûn
@nan
2012年の論文
@ja
2012年論文
@yue
2012年論文
@zh-hant
2012年論文
@zh-hk
2012年論文
@zh-mo
2012年論文
@zh-tw
2012年论文
@wuu
2012年论文
@zh
2012年论文
@zh-cn
name
Impact of the definition of pe ...... ication of treatment response.
@en
Impact of the definition of pe ...... ication of treatment response.
@nl
type
label
Impact of the definition of pe ...... ication of treatment response.
@en
Impact of the definition of pe ...... ication of treatment response.
@nl
prefLabel
Impact of the definition of pe ...... ication of treatment response.
@en
Impact of the definition of pe ...... ication of treatment response.
@nl
P2093
P2860
P1476
Impact of the definition of pe ...... ication of treatment response.
@en
P2093
Matt Vanderhoek
Robert Jeraj
Scott B Perlman
P2860
P356
10.2967/JNUMED.111.093443
P407
P577
2012-01-01T00:00:00Z