Literature DB >> 29998155

Response to the Letter to Editor.

Yuji Tsutsui1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Year:  2018        PMID: 29998155      PMCID: PMC6038964     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Asia Ocean J Nucl Med Biol        ISSN: 2322-5718


× No keyword cloud information.
We read with great interest the letter to the editor and the article by Nakahara et al. (Nakahara T, Daisaki H, Yamamoto Y, Iimori T, Miyagawa K, Okamoto T, et al. Use of a digital phantom developed by QIBA for harmonizing SUVs obtained from the state-of-the-art SPECT/CT systems: a multicenter study. EJNMMI Research. 2017;7:53.) (1). It is embarrassing that we did not recognize their paper in an academic journal of EJNMMI Research. I was ashamed of our ignorance with their works, although their focus in SPECT was different with ours with PET. The digital phantom has been widely used in nuclear medicine technology field for a long time (1-3). We also used it in our previous study (4). Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (QIBA), an organization to improve the quantitative accuracy of imaging biomarkers, generated a digital phantom as a standard for a PET oncology (5). This phantom is introduced on the website, and is open and freely available to be used for examinations. On the other hand, root mean squared error (RMSE) is a frequently used measure of the differences between values observed. RMSE is a simple mathematical measure and has been used for long time in nuclear medicine and molecular imaging technique with an identical formula (6-8). Based on these backgrounds, it is no wonder that many researchers may conceive to investigate the quantitative accuracy of images with a combination of RMSE and QIBA phantom. Although we did not recognize the article by Nakahara et al, we may be better to cite their article in our manuscript. Thank you for your understanding.

Conflicts of interest

None declared.
  5 in total

1.  MRI-based motion correction of thoracic PET: initial comparison of acquisition protocols and correction strategies suitable for simultaneous PET/MRI systems.

Authors:  Nikolaos Dikaios; David Izquierdo-Garcia; Martin J Graves; Venkatesh Mani; Zahi A Fayad; Tim D Fryer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-09-22       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  A Digital Reference Object to Analyze Calculation Accuracy of PET Standardized Uptake Value.

Authors:  Larry A Pierce; Brian F Elston; David A Clunie; Dennis Nelson; Paul E Kinahan
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-05-19       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Harmonizing SUVs in multicentre trials when using different generation PET systems: prospective validation in non-small cell lung cancer patients.

Authors:  Charline Lasnon; Cédric Desmonts; Elske Quak; Radj Gervais; Pascal Do; Catherine Dubos-Arvis; Nicolas Aide
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2013-04-06       Impact factor: 9.236

4.  SUVref: reducing reconstruction-dependent variation in PET SUV.

Authors:  Matthew D Kelly; Jerome M Declerck
Journal:  EJNMMI Res       Date:  2011-08-18       Impact factor: 3.138

5.  Influences of reconstruction and attenuation correction in brain SPECT images obtained by the hybrid SPECT/CT device: evaluation with a 3-dimensional brain phantom.

Authors:  Mana Akamatsu; Yasuo Yamashita; Go Akamatsu; Yuji Tsutsui; Nobuyoshi Ohya; Yasuhiko Nakamura; Masayuki Sasaki
Journal:  Asia Ocean J Nucl Med Biol       Date:  2014
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.