Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 475

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Characterization of PET/CT images using texture analysis: the past, the present… any future?

Open access
Hatt, Mathieu, Tixier, Florent, Pierce, Larry, Kinahan, Paul E., Le Rest, Catherine Cheze, Visvikis, Dimitris·2017·European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Abstract

After seminal papers over the period 2009 – 2011, the use of texture analysis of PET/CT images for quantification of intratumour uptake heterogeneity has received increasing attention in the last 4 years. Results are difficult to compare due to the heterogeneity of studies and lack of standardization. There are also numerous challenges to address. In this review we provide critical insights into the recent development of texture analysis for quantifying the heterogeneity in PET/CT images, identify issues and challenges, and offer recommendations for the use of texture analysis in clinical research. Numerous potentially confounding issues have been identified, related to the complex workflow for the calculation of textural features, and the dependency of features on various factors such as acquisition, image reconstruction, preprocessing, functional volume segmentation, and methods of establishing and quantifying correspondences with genomic and clinical metrics of interest. A lack of understanding of what the features may represent in terms of the underlying pathophysiological processes and the variability of technical implementation practices makes comparing results in the literature challenging, if not impossible. Since progress as a field requires pooling results, there is an urgent need for standardization and recommendations/guidelines to enable the field to move forward. We provide a list of correct formulae for usual features and recommendations regarding implementation. Studies on larger cohorts with robust statistical analysis and machine learning approaches are promising directions to evaluate the potential of this approach.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00259-016-3427-0

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 475

Metadata

Authors
Hatt, M., Tixier, F., Pierce, L., Kinahan, P. E., Le Rest, C. C., & Visvikis, D.
Venue
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
Published
2016-06-06
Volume
44
Issue
1
Pages
151-165
ISSN
  • 1619-7070 (ISSN-L)
  • 1619-7089
OpenAlex
W2409456704
Cited by
475
References
6
FWCI
46.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Characterization of PET/CT images using texture analysis: the past, the present… any future? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s00259-016-3427-0
The paper
Hatt, M., Tixier, F., Pierce, L., Kinahan, P. E., Le Rest, C. C., & Visvikis, D. (2017). Characterization of PET/CT images using texture analysis: the past, the present… any future? European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-016-3427-0

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.