MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306404284 · doi:10.1002/mp.16055

Simulation of a novel, non‐invasive radiation detector to measure the arterial input function for dynamic positron emission tomography

2022· article· en· W4306404284 on OpenAlexafffund
Liam Carroll, Shirin A. Enger

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsImaging phantomPositron emission tomographyDetectorMonte Carlo methodBiomedical engineeringNuclear medicinePhysicsMaterials scienceOpticsMedicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Dynamic positron emission tomography (dPET) is a nuclear medicine imaging technique providing functional images for organs of interest with applications in oncology, cardiology, and drug discovery. This technique requires the acquisition of the time‐course arterial plasma activity concentration, called the arterial input function (AIF), which is conventionally acquired via arterial blood sampling. Purpose The aim of this study was to (A) optimize the geometry for a novel and cost efficient non‐invasive detector called NID designed to measure the AIF for dPET scans through Monte Carlo simulations and (B) develop a clinical data analysis chain to successfully separate the arterial component of a simulated AIF signal from the venous component. Methods The NID was optimized by using an in‐house Geant4‐based software package. The sensitive volume of the NID consists of a band of 10 cm long and 1 mm in diameter scintillating fibers placed over a wrist phantom. The phantom was simulated as a cylinder, 10 cm long and 6.413 cm in diameter comprised of polyethylene with two holes placed through it to simulate the patient's radial artery and vein. This phantom design was chosen to match the wrist phantom used in our previous proof of concept work. Two geometries were simulated with different arrangements of scintillating fibers. The first design used a single layer of 64 fibers. The second used two layers, an inner layer with 29 fibers and an outer layer with 30 fibers. Four positron emitting radioisotopes were simulated:18F,11C,15O, and68Ga with 100 million simulated decay events per run. The total and intrinsic efficiencies of both designs were calculated as well as the full width half maximum (FWHM) of the signal. In addition, contribution by the annihilation photons versus positrons to the signal was investigated. The results obtained from the two simulated detector models were compared. A clinical data analysis chain using an expectation maximization maximum likelihood algorithm was tested. This analysis chain will be used to separate arterial counts from the total signal. Results The second NID design with two layers of scintillating fibers had a higher efficiency for all simulations with a maximum increase of 17% total efficiency for11C simulation. All simulations had a significant annihilation photon contribution. The signal for18F and11C was almost entirely due to photons. The clinical data analysis chain was within 1% of the true value for 434 out of 440 trials. Further experimental studies to validate these simulations will be required. Conclusions The design of the NID was optimized and its efficiency increased through Monte Carlo simulations. A clinical data analysis chain was successfully developed to separate the arterial component of an AIF signal from the venous component. The simulations show that the NID can be used to accurately measure the AIF non‐invasively for dPET scans.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207