Comparison of 11C-methionine PET and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET in differentiated thyroid cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this prospective study is to evaluate the possibility of 11C-methionine (Met) PET compared with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET for the detection of recurrent or metastatic disease in patients with differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty patients with clinical suspicion of recurrent DTC but negative posttreatment 131I-whole body scans were included in the study. Both 11C-Met PET and 18F-FDG PET were performed within 1 week. PET images were analyzed by two independent and blinded physicians using visual and standardized uptake value analysis. PET results were also correlated with radiologic and/or cytological investigations. RESULTS: Thirteen patients showed concordant findings on both PET scans: six patients showed uptake and in seven no uptake was observed. In six of the seven patients without Met and FDG uptake, additional MRI and ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration cytology of the lymph nodes revealed inconclusive or negative results. Six patients showed discordant findings on the PET scans: in three patients uptake was only observed on the Met PET, confirmed by MRI in one. In three patients lesions were seen on the FDG PET, confirmed by computed tomography or ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration cytology. However, those lesions were not compatible with the lesions seen on the Met PET. In general, FDG uptake appeared to be higher than Met uptake, but was not significant (P=0.075). CONCLUSION: This study shows that imaging using radiolabeled amino acids is feasible in DTC. For now, 11C-Met PET has not proven to be superior to 18F-FDG PET in the detection of recurrent disease in DTC. Complementary uptake of Met and FDG has, however, been observed, which has to be further clarified and long-term follow-up is needed to define the true clinical value of the 11C-Met PET, and possible other amino acids tracers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".