MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411232956 · doi:10.2967/jnumed.124.268831

Dual-Tracer Imaging on a Long–Axial-Field-of-View PET: A Proof-of-Principle Study with [<sup>18</sup>F]FGln and [<sup>18</sup>F]FDG

2025· article· en· W4411232956 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Kwon, Elizabeth J. Li, Christina Dulal, Margaret E. Daube-Witherspoon, Varsha Viswanath, Anthony J. Young, Raheema A Damani, Jason Hou-Liu, Elizabeth S. McDonald, David A. Mankoff, Joel S. Karp, Austin R. Pantel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsPhysicsNuclear physicsNuclear medicineMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current protocols necessitate imaging 2 18F-labeled tracers in separate sessions. Herein, we report on the development and testing of a protocol that sequentially images 2 18F-labeled tracers—18F-(2S,4R)4-fluoroglutamine, commonly known as [18F]FGln, and [18F]FDG—in a single session on a long–axial-field-of-view PET scanner to study cancer metabolism. Methods: A single [18F]FGln scan was used to estimate the minimal injected activity and scan duration to calculate an accurate volume of distribution. This was followed by a dual-tracer study in a second patient with a low-dose (41-MBq), shortened (29-min) [18F]FGln scan, followed by a full-dose (394-MBq) [18F]FDG scan for 60 min. Protocol performance was assessed using the resulting kinetic parameters. Results: [18F]FGln subsampling demonstrated stable estimates of volume of distribution with a scan duration of 30 min and a dose of 37 MBq. The dual-tracer [18F]FDG image obtained 60 min after injection was of diagnostic quality, with minimal (6%) residual [18F]FGln signal. Conclusion: This proof-of-principle dual-tracer study demonstrated the feasibility of a [18F]FGln/[18F]FDG protocol that leveraged the high sensitivity of long–axial-field-of-view PET to inject the first tracer at a low dose and the second tracer at a greater dose, overwhelming the signal from the first tracer.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nuclear MedicineSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207