MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimised production of technetium-94m for PET imaging by proton-irradiation of phosphomolybdic acid in cyclotron liquid target

2024· article· en· W4399272671 on OpenAlexaff
R. K. Harper, Derek R. Morim, Dhyey Mehta, Veronika Rosecker, Stephen J. Archibald, Richard Southworth, Philip J. Blower, Karin A. Stephenson, Karin Nielsen

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Radiation and Isotopes · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiopharmaceutical Chemistry and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsPhosphomolybdic acidCyclotronChemistryIrradiationRadiochemistryNuclear chemistryYield (engineering)ProtonAqueous solutionMaterials scienceCatalysisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Natural-abundance phosphomolybdic acid (H3(Mo12PO40) ‧12H2O, 0.181-0.552 g Mo/mL) solutions were irradiated with 12.9 MeV protons on a GE PETtrace cyclotron using an adapted standard liquid target. Technetium-94m (94mTc) was produced through the 94Mo(p,n)94mTc nuclear reaction with saturation yields of up to 53 ± 6 MBq/μA. End of bombardment activities of 161 ± 17 MBq and 157 ± 7 MBq were achieved for the 0.552 g Mo/mL solution (10 μA for 30 minutes) and 0.181 g Mo/mL solution (15 μA for 60 minutes), respectively. No visible degradation of the niobium target body and foil were seen during the irradiations of up to 15 μA for 60 minutes. The produced 94mTc was separated from the target phosphomolybdic acid solution with >98% recovery using an aqueous biphasic extraction resin. Compared to previous reported liquid target methods for 94mTc production, the better production yield, in-target solution stability during irradiation and 94mTc separation recovery of phosphomolybdic acid makes it a very promising target material for routine clinical 94mTc production at medical facilities with liquid targets already installed for 18F production.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Radiation and IsotopesSame topicRadiopharmaceutical Chemistry and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207