Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 375

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparison of Bolus and Infusion Methods for Receptor Quantitation: Application to [18F]Cyclofoxy and Positron Emission Tomography

Carson, Richard E., Channing, Michael A., Blasberg, Ronald G., Dunn, Bonnie B., Cohen, Robert M., Rice, Kenner C., Herscovitch, Peter·1993·Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism

Abstract

Positron emission tomography studies with the opiate antagonist [18 F]cyclofoxy ([18 F]CF) were performed in baboons. Bolus injection studies demonstrated initial uptake dependent on blood flow. The late uptake showed highest binding in caudate nuclei, amygdala, thalamus, and brainstem and the least accumulation in cerebellum. By 60 min postinjection, regional brain radioactivity cleared at the same rate as metabolite-corrected plasma, i.e., transient equilibrium was achieved. Compartmental modeling methods were applied to time-activity curves from brain and metabolite-corrected plasma. Individual rate constants were estimated with poor precision. The model estimate of the total volume of distribution ( V T), representing the ratio of tissue radioactivity to metabolite-corrected plasma at equilibrium, was reliably determined. The apparent volume of distribution ( V a), the concentration ratio of tissue to metabolite-corrected plasma during transient equilibrium, was compared with the fitted V T values to determine if single-scan methods could provide accurate receptor measurements. V a significantly overestimated V T and produced artificially high image contrast. These differences were predicted by compartment model theory and were caused by a plasma clearance rate that was close to the slowest tissue clearance rate. To develop a simple method to measure V T, an infusion protocol consisting of bolus plus continuous infusion (B/I) of CF was designed and applied in a separate set of studies. The V a values from the B/I studies agreed with the V T values from both B/I and bolus studies. This infusion approach can produce accurate receptor measurements and has the potential to shorten scan time and simplify the acquisition and processing of scan and blood data.

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 · 10.1038/jcbfm.1993.6

Cites

32 of 32 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 32 references

Cited by

See all 375

Metadata

Authors
Carson, R. E., Channing, M. A., Blasberg, R. G., Dunn, B. B., Cohen, R. M., Rice, K. C., & Herscovitch, P.
Venue
Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism
Published
1993-01
Volume
13
Issue
1
Pages
24-42
ISSN
  • 0271-678X (ISSN-L)
  • 1559-7016
OpenAlex
W2046045427
Cited by
375
References
32
FWCI
9.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Comparison of Bolus and Infusion Methods for Receptor Quantitation: Application to [18F]Cyclofoxy and Positron Emission Tomography. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/jcbfm.1993.6
The paper
Carson, R. E., Channing, M. A., Blasberg, R. G., Dunn, B. B., Cohen, R. M., Rice, K. C., & Herscovitch, P. (1993). Comparison of Bolus and Infusion Methods for Receptor Quantitation: Application to [18F]Cyclofoxy and Positron Emission Tomography. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism. https://doi.org/10.1038/jcbfm.1993.6

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.