Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • View or Listen to JNM Podcast
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
Research ArticleClinical Investigation

Measurement of PET Quantitative Bias In Vivo

Martin A. Lodge, Wojciech Lesniak, Michael A. Gorin, Kenneth J. Pienta, Steven P. Rowe and Martin G. Pomper
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2021, 62 (5) 732-737; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.120.251397
Martin A. Lodge
1Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Wojciech Lesniak
1Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michael A. Gorin
1Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; and
2James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kenneth J. Pienta
2James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Steven P. Rowe
1Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; and
2James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Martin G. Pomper
1Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; and
2James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Figure1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
  • FIGURE 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 1.

    Example PET/CT images for typical patient. PET data were acquired 24, 79, and 264 min after injection (from left to right). Cylindric VOIs can be seen in descending aorta, with SUV as indicated. Fused display shows PET in hot-body color map, scaled from 0 to 20 SUV units in each image. Patient weighed 90.5 kg and was administered 339.7 MBq of 18F-DCFPyL.

  • FIGURE 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 2.

    Example time–activity data for patient shown in Figure 1. Circles indicate whole blood samples counted on calibrated γ-counter. Squares indicate PET-derived data from VOIs in descending aorta. Line is triexponential model fit to γ-counter data. All data were decay-corrected to time of injection.

  • FIGURE 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 3.

    PET and γ-counter radioactivity concentration data for 10 patients, each with 3 corresponding measurements. Line indicates linear fit to data: y = 1.06x – 64, R 2 = 0.985.

  • FIGURE 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 4.

    Bland–Altman plots showing difference between PET and γ-counter measurements in radioactivity concentration units (A) and relative units (B). Lines indicate linear regression. Relative difference was not proportional to radioactivity concentration and had mean value of 4.8% ± 8.6%.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine: 62 (5)
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 62, Issue 5
May 10, 2021
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Measurement of PET Quantitative Bias In Vivo
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
Measurement of PET Quantitative Bias In Vivo
Martin A. Lodge, Wojciech Lesniak, Michael A. Gorin, Kenneth J. Pienta, Steven P. Rowe, Martin G. Pomper
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2021, 62 (5) 732-737; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.120.251397

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Measurement of PET Quantitative Bias In Vivo
Martin A. Lodge, Wojciech Lesniak, Michael A. Gorin, Kenneth J. Pienta, Steven P. Rowe, Martin G. Pomper
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2021, 62 (5) 732-737; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.120.251397
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Visual Abstract
    • Abstract
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSION
    • DISCLOSURE
    • KEY POINTS
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • This Month in JNM
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Specific Uptake in the Bone Marrow Causes High Absorbed Red Marrow Doses During [177Lu]Lu-DOTATATE Treatment
  • Specific Uptake in the Bone Marrow Causes High Absorbed Red Marrow Doses During [177Lu]Lu-DOTATATE Treatment
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • First-in-Human Study of 18F-Labeled PET Tracer for Glutamate AMPA Receptor [18F]K-40: A Derivative of [11C]K-2
  • Detection of HER2-Low Lesions Using HER2-Targeted PET Imaging in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Paired HER2 PET and Tumor Biopsy Analysis
  • [11C]Carfentanil PET Whole-Body Imaging of μ-Opioid Receptors: A First in-Human Study
Show more Clinical Investigation

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • PET
  • quantitative
  • bias
  • in vivo
  • biomarker
  • calibration
SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire