Reproducible quantification of cardiac sympathetic innervation using graphical modeling of carbon-11-meta-hydroxyephedrine kinetics with dynamic PET-CT imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Graphical methods of radiotracer kinetic modeling in PET are ideal for parametric imaging and data quality assurance but can suffer from noise bias. This study compared the Logan and Multilinear Analysis-1 (MA1) graphical models to the standard one-tissue-compartment (1TC) model, including correction for partial-volume effects, in dynamic PET-CT studies of myocardial sympathetic innervation in the left ventricle (LV) using [11C]HED. Test and retest [11C]HED PET imaging (47 ± 22 days apart) was performed in 18 subjects with heart failure symptoms. Myocardial tissue volume of distribution (VT) was estimated using Logan and MA1 graphical methods and compared to the 1TC standard model values using intraclass correlation (ICC) and Bland-Altman analysis of the non-parametric reproducibility coefficient (NPC). A modeling start-time of t* = 5 min gave the best fit for both Logan and MA1 (R2 = 0.95) methods. Logan slightly underestimated VT relative to 1TC (p = 0.002), whereas MA1 did not (p = 0.96). Both the MA1 and Logan models exhibited good-to-excellent agreement with the 1TC (MA1-1TC ICC = 0.96; Logan-1TC ICC = 0.93) with no significant differences in NPC between the two comparisons (p = 0.92). All methods exhibited good-to-excellent test-retest repeatability with no significant differences in NPC (p = 0.57). Logan and MA1 models exhibited similar agreement and variability compared to the 1TC for modeling of [11C]HED kinetics. Using t* = 5 min and partial-volume correction produced accurate estimates of VT as an index of myocardial sympathetic innervation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".