Fibroblast Activation Protein Inhibitor (FAPI)-Radioligand PET/CT in the Assessment of Nononcological Diseases: A Narrative Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This narrative review provides an overview of benign FAPI-PET/CT or PET/MRI findings and studies investigating molecular imaging in nononcological diseases. Although the current focus of [68Ga]-Ga-FAPI PET/CT is on oncologic indications, there is growing interest in the potential of FAPI PET/CT for nononcologic applications. Taking into account all-in-one, clinical, and preclinical studies, and the priorities of FAPI imaging over 2-[18F]-FDG, the future direction of growing interest in the potential of FAPI tracer PET/CT as a promising technique in targeting fibroblast activation protein can be classified into some main fields for imaging and treatment monitoring. (1) Imaging of fibrotic disease, (2) cardiovascular imaging, (3) inflammatory and infectious diseases, (4) bone disease, (5) neuroimaging, and (6) organ transplantation imaging. The FAPI-radioligand shows promise as a targeted tracer for identifying and monitoring nononcological conditions, but current evidence is mainly based on small, heterogeneous retrospective analyses and case reports. Therefore, prospective studies are needed to reach reliable conclusions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".