Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 118

1.

Standards for PET image acquisition and quantitative data analysis.

Boellaard R.

J Nucl Med. 2009 May;50 Suppl 1:11S-20S. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.108.057182. Review.

2.

The use of standardized uptake values for assessing FDG uptake with PET in oncology: a clinical perspective.

Lucignani G, Paganelli G, Bombardieri E.

Nucl Med Commun. 2004 Jul;25(7):651-6. Review.

PMID:
15208491
3.

Influence of reconstruction iterations on 18F-FDG PET/CT standardized uptake values.

Jaskowiak CJ, Bianco JA, Perlman SB, Fine JP.

J Nucl Med. 2005 Mar;46(3):424-8.

4.

Positron emission tomography-computed tomography standardized uptake values in clinical practice and assessing response to therapy.

Kinahan PE, Fletcher JW.

Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2010 Dec;31(6):496-505. doi: 10.1053/j.sult.2010.10.001. Review.

5.

18F-FDG PET as a candidate for "qualified biomarker": functional assessment of treatment response in oncology.

Larson SM, Schwartz LH.

J Nucl Med. 2006 Jun;47(6):901-3. No abstract available.

6.

Quantification of FDG PET studies using standardised uptake values in multi-centre trials: effects of image reconstruction, resolution and ROI definition parameters.

Westerterp M, Pruim J, Oyen W, Hoekstra O, Paans A, Visser E, van Lanschot J, Sloof G, Boellaard R.

Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007 Mar;34(3):392-404.

PMID:
17033848
7.

Comparison of different SUV-based methods for monitoring cytotoxic therapy with FDG PET.

Stahl A, Ott K, Schwaiger M, Weber WA.

Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004 Nov;31(11):1471-8.

PMID:
15257418
8.

[Understanding positon emission tomography (PET) with [18F]-FDG in clinical oncology. Informations dedicated to patients and relatives].

Bourguet P, Brusco S, Corone C, Devillers A, Foehrenbach H, Lumbroso JD, Maszelin P, Montravers F, Moretti JL, Rain JD, Talbot JN, Carretier J, Leichtnam-Dugarin L, Delavigne V, Philip T, Fervers B; Fédération nationale des centres de lutte contre le cancer (FNCLCC).; Standards, Options: Recommendations.; SFBMN.; Ligue nationale contre le cancer.; Fédération hospitalière de France.; Fédération nationale de cancérologie des Centres hospitaliers régionaux et universitaires.; Fédération française de cancérologie..

Bull Cancer. 2005 Jul;92(7):723-32. French.

9.

[Technical Approaches for Quantitative Treatment Responses Using 18F-FDG PET].

Miwa K, Miyaji N, Umeda T, Murata T, Wagatsuma K, Sasaki M.

Igaku Butsuri. 2015;35(1):30-8. Review. Japanese.

PMID:
26753394
10.

Accuracy of PET for diagnosis of solid pulmonary lesions with 18F-FDG uptake below the standardized uptake value of 2.5.

Hashimoto Y, Tsujikawa T, Kondo C, Maki M, Momose M, Nagai A, Ohnuki T, Nishikawa T, Kusakabe K.

J Nucl Med. 2006 Mar;47(3):426-31.

11.

FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0.

Boellaard R, O'Doherty MJ, Weber WA, Mottaghy FM, Lonsdale MN, Stroobants SG, Oyen WJ, Kotzerke J, Hoekstra OS, Pruim J, Marsden PK, Tatsch K, Hoekstra CJ, Visser EP, Arends B, Verzijlbergen FJ, Zijlstra JM, Comans EF, Lammertsma AA, Paans AM, Willemsen AT, Beyer T, Bockisch A, Schaefer-Prokop C, Delbeke D, Baum RP, Chiti A, Krause BJ.

Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010 Jan;37(1):181-200. doi: 10.1007/s00259-009-1297-4.

12.

Dual-time-point [18F]-FDG PET/CT in the diagnostic evaluation of suspicious breast lesions.

Caprio MG, Cangiano A, Imbriaco M, Soscia F, Di Martino G, Farina A, Avitabile G, Pace L, Forestieri P, Salvatore M.

Radiol Med. 2010 Mar;115(2):215-24. doi: 10.1007/s11547-009-0491-6. English, Italian.

PMID:
20017002
13.

Standardized uptake value-based evaluations of solitary pulmonary nodules using F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose-PET/computed tomography.

Degirmenci B, Wilson D, Laymon CM, Becker C, Mason NS, Bencherif B, Agarwal A, Luketich J, Landreneau R, Avril N.

Nucl Med Commun. 2008 Jul;29(7):614-22. doi: 10.1097/MNM.0b013e3282f9b5a0.

PMID:
18528183
14.

Detection of Klatskin's tumor in extrahepatic bile duct strictures using delayed 18F-FDG PET/CT: preliminary results for 22 patient studies.

Reinhardt MJ, Strunk H, Gerhardt T, Roedel R, Jaeger U, Bucerius J, Sauerbruch T, Biersack HJ, Dumoulin FL.

J Nucl Med. 2005 Jul;46(7):1158-63.

15.

Interim positron emission tomography scan in multi-center studies: optimization of visual and quantitative assessments.

Zijlstra JM, Boellaard R, Hoekstra OS.

Leuk Lymphoma. 2009 Nov;50(11):1748-9. doi: 10.3109/10428190903308049.

PMID:
19863171
16.

Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology.

Fletcher JW, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP, Siegel BA, Lowe VJ, Lyman GH, Coleman RE, Wahl R, Paschold JC, Avril N, Einhorn LH, Suh WW, Samson D, Delbeke D, Gorman M, Shields AF.

J Nucl Med. 2008 Mar;49(3):480-508. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.107.047787.

17.

Optimizing positron emission tomography image acquisition protocols in integrated positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging.

Hartung-Knemeyer V, Beiderwellen KJ, Buchbender C, Kuehl H, Lauenstein TC, Bockisch A, Poeppel TD.

Invest Radiol. 2013 May;48(5):290-4. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3182823695.

PMID:
23399811
18.

Comparative assessment of methods for estimating tumor volume and standardized uptake value in (18)F-FDG PET.

Tylski P, Stute S, Grotus N, Doyeux K, Hapdey S, Gardin I, Vanderlinden B, Buvat I.

J Nucl Med. 2010 Feb;51(2):268-76. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.109.066241.

19.

PET evaluation of fatty tumors in the extremity: possibility of using the standardized uptake value (SUV) to differentiate benign tumors from liposarcoma.

Suzuki R, Watanabe H, Yanagawa T, Sato J, Shinozaki T, Suzuki H, Endo K, Takagishi K.

Ann Nucl Med. 2005 Dec;19(8):661-70.

PMID:
16444991
20.

A systematic review of the factors affecting accuracy of SUV measurements.

Adams MC, Turkington TG, Wilson JM, Wong TZ.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Aug;195(2):310-20. doi: 10.2214/AJR.10.4923. Review. Erratum in: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Oct;195(4):1043.

PMID:
20651185

Supplemental Content

Support Center