MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056674043 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/56/14/020

Dual-isotope PET using positron-gamma emitters

2011· article· en· W2056674043 on OpenAlexafffund
Andriy Andreyev, A. Ćeller

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersInstitute of GeneticsCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPositronIsotopePositron emission tomographyAnnihilationPhysicsGamma rayCoincidenceNuclear physicsPhotonPositron emissionRadiochemistryElectronNuclear medicineChemistryOpticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Positron emission tomography (PET) is widely recognized as a highly effective functional imaging modality. Unfortunately, standard PET cannot be used for dual-isotope imaging (which would allow for simultaneous investigation of two different biological processes), because positron-electron annihilation products from different tracers are indistinguishable in terms of energy. Methods that have been proposed for dual-isotope PET rely on differences in half-lives of the participating isotopes; these approaches, however, require making assumptions concerning kinetic behavior of the tracers and may not lead to optimal results. In this paper we propose a novel approach for dual-isotope PET and investigate its performance using GATE simulations. Our method requires one of the two radioactive isotopes to be a pure positron emitter and the second isotope to emit an additional high-energy gamma in a cascade simultaneously with positron emission. Detection of this auxiliary prompt gamma in coincidence with the annihilation event allows us to identify the corresponding 511 keV photon pair as originating from the same isotope. Two list-mode datasets are created: a primary dataset that contains all detected 511 keV photon pairs from both isotopes, and a second, tagged (much smaller) dataset that contains only those PET events for which a coincident prompt gamma has also been detected. An image reconstructed from the tagged dataset reflects the distribution of the second positron-gamma radiotracer and serves as a prior for the reconstruction of the primary dataset. Our preliminary simulation study with partially overlapping (18)F/(22)Na and (18)F/(60)Cu radiotracer distributions showed that in these two cases the dual-isotope PET method allowed for separation of the two activity distributions and recovered total activities with relative errors of about 5%.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.464
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.316
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.114 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations78
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207