Townsend DW. Dual-modality imaging: combining anatomy and function. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:938–55.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Bastiaannet E, Groen B, Jager PL, Cobben DCP, van der Graaf WTA, Vaalburg W, et al. The value of FDG-PET in the detection, grading and response to therapy of soft tissue and bone sarcomas; a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Treat Rev. 2004;30:83–101.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Slomka PJ, Pan T, Germano G. Recent advances and future progress in PET instrumentation. Semin Nucl Med. 2016;46:5–19.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Hsu DFC, Ilan E, Peterson WT, Uribe J, Lubberink M, Levin CS. Studies of a next-generation silicon-photomultiplier–based time-of-flight PET/CT system. J Nucl Med. 2017;58:1511–8.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Boellaard R, Delgado-Bolton R, Oyen WJG, Giammarile F, Tatsch K, Eschner W, et al. FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;42:328–54.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Boellaard R, Oyen WJG, Hoekstra CJ, Hoekstra OS, Visser EP, Willemsen AT, et al. The Netherlands protocol for standardisation and quantification of FDG whole body PET studies in multi-centre trials. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:2320–33.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Weber WA. Use of PET for monitoring cancer therapy and for predicting outcome. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:983–95.
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Shankar LK, Hoffman JM, Bacharach S, Graham MM, Karp J, Lammertsma AA, et al. Consensus recommendations for the use of 18F-FDG PET as an indicator of therapeutic response in patients in National Cancer Institute Trials. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1059–66.
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Freedman NMT, Sundaram SK, Kurdziel K, Carrasquillo JA, Whatley M, Carson JM, et al. Comparison of SUV and Patlak slope for monitoring of cancer therapy using serial PET scans. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30:46–53.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Huang SC. Anatomy of SUV. Nucl Med Biol. 2000;27:643–6.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Lammertsma AA, Hoekstra CJ, Giaccone G, Hoekstra OS. How should we analyse FDG PET studies for monitoring tumour response? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33:S16-21.
Article
Google Scholar
Zaidi H, Karakatsanis N. Towards enhanced pet quantification in clinical oncology. Br J Radiol. 2018;91:20170508.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Karakatsanis NA, Zhou Y, Lodge MA, Casey ME, Wahl RL, Zaidi H, et al. Generalized whole-body patlak parametric imaging for enhanced quantification in clinical PET. Phys Med Biol. 2015;60:8643–73.
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Karakatsanis NA, Lodge MA, Tahari AK, Zhou Y, Wahl RL, Rahmim A. Dynamic whole body PET parametric imaging: I. Concept, acquisition protocol optimization and clinical application Nicolas. Phys Med Biol. 2014;49:1012–6.
Google Scholar
Patlak CS, Blasberg RG. Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants from multiple-time uptake data. Generalizations. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1985;5:584–90.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Prenosil GA, Sari H, Fürstner M, Afshar-Oromieh A, Shi K, Rominger A, et al. Performance characteristics of the biograph Vision Quadra PET/CT system with long axial field of view using the NEMA NU 2-2018 standard. J Nucl Med. 2021;63:476–84.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Karakatsanis NA, Casey ME, Lodge MA, Rahmim A, Zaidi H. Whole-body direct 4D parametric PET imaging employing nested generalized Patlak expectation-maximization reconstruction. Phys Med Biol. 2016;61:5456–85.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Naganawa M, Gallezot J-D, Shah V, Mulnix T, Chen M-K, Smith A, et al. Assessment of population-based input functions for the Patlak plot using whole body 18F-FDG PET imaging. EJNMMI Phys. 2020;7:67.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Karakatsanis N, Zhou Y, Lodge M, Casey M, Wahl R, Subramaniam R, et al. Clinical Whole-body PET Patlak imaging 60–90min post-injection employing a population-based input function. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(suppl 3):1786.
Google Scholar
Karakatsanis N, Lodge M, Casey M, Wahl R, Subramaniam R, Zaidi H, et al. Novel multi-parametric SUV/Patlak FDG-PET whole-body imaging framework for routine application to clinical oncology. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(suppl 3):625.
Google Scholar
Yao S, Feng T, Zhao Y, Wu R, Wang R, Wu W, et al. Simplified protocol for whole-body Patlak parametric imaging with 18 F-FDG PET/CT : feasibility and error analysis. Med Phys. 2021;48:2160–9.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Wu Y, Feng T, Shen Y, Fu F, Meng N, Li X, et al. Total-body parametric imaging using the Patlak model: feasibility of reduced scan time. Med Phys. 2022;49:4529–39.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
van Sluis J, Yaqub M, Brouwers AH, Dierckx RAJO, Noordzij W, Boellaard R. Use of population input functions for reduced scan duration whole-body Patlak 18F-FDG PET imaging. EJNMMI Phys. 2021;8:11.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Spencer BA, Berg E, Schmall JP, Omidvari N, Leung EK, Abdelhafez YG, et al. Performance evaluation of the uEXPLORER total-body PET/CT scanner based on NEMA NU 2–2018 with additional tests to characterize PET scanners with a long axial field of view. J Nucl Med. 2021;62:861–70.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Wu J, Liu H, Ye Q, Gallezot JD, Naganawa M, Miao T, et al. Generation of parametric Ki images for FDG PET using two 5-min scans. Med Phys. 2021;48:5219–31.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Viswanath V, Sari H, Pantel AR, Conti M, Daube-Witherspoon ME, Mingels C, et al. Abbreviated scan protocols to capture 18F-FDG kinetics for long axial FOV PET scanners. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2022;49:3215–25.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Boellaard R. New Developments of EANM Oncology PET/CT Guidelines and Update of the EARL Accreditation Standards Presentation. 2018. https://eanm-earl-wordpress.esh.netkey.at/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/EARL_18F_stds2_PPP_Boellaard_Oct2018-1.pdf
Van Der WAP, Klein LJ, Boellaard R, Visser CA, Visser FC, Lammertsma AA. Image-derived input functions for determination of MRGlu in cardiac 18 F-FDG PET scans. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:1622–9.
Google Scholar
Patlak CS, Blasberg RG. Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants from multiple-time uptake data. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1983;5:584–90.
Article
Google Scholar
Cheebsumon P, Velasquez LM, Hoekstra CJ, Hayes W, Kloet RW, Hoetjes NJ, et al. Measuring response to therapy using FDG PET: Semi-quantitative and full kinetic analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:832–42.
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Boellaard R. Quantitative oncology molecular analysis suite: ACCURATE. J Nucl Med. 2018;59(suppl 1):1753.
Google Scholar
Vandenberghe S, Moskal P, Karp JS. State of the art in total body PET. EJNMMI Phys. 2020;7:35.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Surti S, Pantel AR, Karp JS. Total body PET: why, how, what for? IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci. 2021;4:283–92.
Article
Google Scholar
Badawi RD, Shi H, Hu P, Chen S, Xu T, Price PM, et al. First human imaging studies with the explorer total-body PET scanner. J Nucl Med. 2019;60:299–303.
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Karp JS, Viswanath V, Geagan MJ, Muehllehner G, Pantel AR, Parma MJ, et al. PennPET explorer: design and preliminary performance of a whole-body imager. J Nucl Med. 2020;61:136–43.
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Pantel AR, Viswanath V, Daube-witherspoon ME, Dubroff JG, Muehllehner G, Parma MJ, et al. PennPET explorer: human imaging on a whole-body imager. J Nucl Med. 2020;61:144–51.
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
De Geus-Oei LF, Visser EP, Krabbe PFM, Van Hoorn BA, Koenders EB, Willemsen AT, et al. Comparison of image-derived and arterial input functions for estimating the rate of glucose metabolism in therapy-monitoring 18F-FDG PET studies. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:945–9.
PubMed
Google Scholar
De Langen AJ, Vincent A, Velasquez LM, Van Tinteren H, Boellaard R, Shankar LK, et al. Repeatability of 18F-FDG uptake measurements in tumors: a metaanalysis. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:701–8.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Weber WA, Gatsonis CA, Mozley PD, Hanna LG, Shields AF, Aberle DR, et al. Repeatability of 18F-FDG PET/CT in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: prospective assessment in 2 multicenter trials. J Nucl Med. 2016;56:1137–43.
Article
Google Scholar
Kramer GM, Frings V, Hoetjes N, Hoekstra OS, Smit EF, De Langen AJ, et al. Repeatability of quantitative whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT uptake measures as function of uptake interval and lesion selection in non-small cell lung cancer patients. J Nucl Med. 2016;57:1343–9.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Gu F, Wu Q, Wu J, Hu D, Zu T, Cao S, et al. Feasibility of standard and generalized Patlak Models for dynamic imaging of multiple organs using the uEXPLORER PET scanner. J Nucl Med. 2022;63(suppl. 2):3185.
Google Scholar
Torizuka T, Tanizaki Y, Kanno T, Futatsubashi M, Yoshikawa E, Okada H. Single 20-second acquisition of clinical feasibility for lung cancer. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:1579–84.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Dias AH, Pedersen MF, Danielsen H, Munk OL, Gormsen LC. Clinical feasibility and impact of fully automated multiparametric PET imaging using direct Patlak reconstruction: evaluation of 103 dynamic whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT scans. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021;48:837–50.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Hoekstra CJ, Hoekstra OS, Stroobants SG, Vansteenkiste J, Nuyts J, Smit EF, et al. Methods to monitor response to chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer with 18 F-FDG. J Nucl Med. 2015;43:1304–10.
Google Scholar
Hoekstra CJ, Hoekstra OS, Stroobants SG, Vansteenkiste J, Nuyts J, Smit EF, et al. Methods to monitor response to chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer with 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:1304–9.
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Alberts I, Hünermund J, Prenosil G, Mingels C, Bohn KP, Viscione M, et al. Clinical performance of long axial field of view PET / CT : a head-to-head intra-individual comparison of the Biograph Vision Quadra with the Biograph Vision PET / CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021;48:2395–404.
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Hu P, Zhang Y, Yu H, Chen S, Tan H, Qi C, et al. Total-body 18 F-FDG PET / CT scan in oncology patients: how fast could it be ? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021;48:2384–94.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Doot RK, Pierce LA, Byrd D, Elston B, Allberg KC, Kinahan PE. Biases in multicenter longitudinal PET standardized uptake value measurements. Transl Oncol. 2014;7:48–54.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Lammertsma AA. Forward to the past: The case for quantitative PET imaging. J Nucl Med. 2017;58:1019–24.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Torizuka T, Tamaki N, Inokuma T, Magata Y, Sasayama S, Yonekura Y, et al. In vivo assessment of glucose metabolism in hepatocellular carcinoma with FDG-PET. J Nucl Med. 1995;36:1811–7.
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar