Cited by 490Medical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsAdvanced X-ray Imaging TechniquesAdvanced X-ray and CT Imaging

High resolution X-ray computed tomography: an emerging tool for small animal cancer research

Open access
Paulus, Michael J., Gleason, Shaun S., Kennel, Stephen J., Hunsicker, Patricia R., Johnson, Dabney K.·2000·Neoplasia

Abstract

Dedicated high-resolution small animal imaging systems have recently emerged as important new tools for cancer research. These new imaging systems permit researchers to noninvasively screen animals for mutations or pathologies and to monitor disease progression and response to therapy. One imaging modality, X-ray microcomputed tomography (microCT) shows promise as a cost-effective means for detecting and characterizing soft-tissue structures, skeletal abnormalities, and tumors in live animals. MicroCT systems provide high-resolution images (typically 50 microns or less), rapid data acquisition (typically 5 to 30 minutes), excellent sensitivity to skeletal tissue and good sensitivity to soft tissue, particularly when contrast-enhancing media are employed. The development of microCT technology for small animal imaging is reviewed, and key considerations for designing small animal microCT imaging protocols are summarized. Recent studies on mouse prostate, lung and bone tumor models are overviewed.

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/sj.neo.7900069

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The dose of radiation in both CT and PET that would need to be delivered to the fish to achieve adequate resolution may have independent biological effects.

    “Another concern is the dose of radiation in both CT and PET that would need to be delivered to the fish to achieve adequate resolution, which may have independent biological effects (Paulus et al., 2000; Pickhardt et al., 2005”

    From Transparent Adult Zebrafish as a Tool for In Vivo Transplantation Analysis (2008) · cites this paper as Paulus et al., 2000

    The Radiation Dose section calls radiation exposure an important concern in microCT studies and compares the estimated dose in mice with published lethal-dose values; Table 1 reports organ doses for high-resolution and screening scans. This supports a concern about CT radiation, but the paper does not establish the dose needed for adequate resolution in fish or address biological effects from PET imaging. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 17

  1. Cherry SR, Shao Y, Silverman RW, Chatziioannou A, Meadors K, Siegel S, Farquhar T, Young J, Jones WF, Newport D, Moyers C, Andreaco M, Paulus M, Binkley D, Nutt R, and Phelps ME ( 1997 ) . MicroPET: a high resolution PET scanner for imaging small animals. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 44, 1161 ± 1166.
  2. Carson R, Daube -Witherspoon M, and Herscovitch P ( Eds. ) , Quantitative Functional Brain Imaging with Positron Emission Tomo- graphy. Academic Press, pp. 3 ± 9.
  3. Weisenberger AG, Bradley E, Majewski S, and Saha M ( 1996 ) . Development of a novel radiation imaging detector system for in vivo gene imaging in small animal studies. Conference Record of the 1996 Medical Imaging Conference, pp. 1201 ± 1205.
  4. Davis GR, Elliott JC, and Anderson P[28] ( 1992 ) . Quantitative microtomography using a 10 m polychromatic X -ray beam from a laboratory source. In: Michette AG, Morrison GR, and Buckley CJ ( Eds. ) , X -ray Microscopy III, Springer Series in Optical Science, Vol. 67, Springer -Verlag, pp. 458 ± 460.
  5. Paulus MJ, Sari -Sarraf H, Gleason SS, Bobrek M, Hicks JS, Johnson DK, Behel JK, Thompson LH, and Allen WC ( 1999 ) . A new X -ray computed tomography system for laboratory mouse imaging. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 46, 558 ± 564.
  6. Bushberg JT, Seibert JA, Leidholt EM, and Boone JM (1995). The Essential Physics of Medical Imaging, Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, MD. Neoplasia . Vol. 2, Nos. 1 ± 2, January-April 2000
  7. Stonestrom JP, Alvarez RE, and Macovski A ( 1981 ) . A framework for spectral artifact corrections in X -ray CT. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 28, 128 ± 141.
  8. Herman GT ( 1980 ) . Image Reconstruction from Projections: The Fundamentals of Computerized Tomography. Academic Press, New York, NY.
  9. Shepp LA, and Logan BF ( 1974 ) . The Fourier reconstruction of a head section. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 21, 21 ± 43.
  10. Ollinger JM ( 1994 ) . Maximum -likelihood reconstruction of transmis- sion images in emission computed tomography via the EM algorithm. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 13, 89 ± 101.
  11. Lange K, and Fessler JA ( 1995 ) . Globally convergent algorithms for maximum a posteriori transmission tomography. IEEE Trans Image Process 4, 1430 ± 1438.
  12. Gleason SS, Sari -Sarraf H, Paulus MJ, Johnson DK, Norton SJ, and Abidi MA ( 1999 ) . Reconstruction of multi -energy X -ray computed tomography images of laboratory mice. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 46, 1081 ± 1086.
  13. Cho Z -H ( 1993 ) . Foundations of Medical Imaging. Wiley, New York, NY.
  14. Concepcion JA, Carpinelli JD, Kuopetravic G, and Reisman S ( 1992 ) . CT fan -beam reconstruction with a nonstationary axis of rotation. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 11, 111 ± 116.
  15. Dusaussoy NJ ( 1996 ) . VOIR, a volumetric image reconstruction algorithm based on Fourier techniques for inversion of the 3 -D radon transform. IEEE Trans Image Process 5, 121 ± 131.
  16. Schaller S, Flohr T, and Steffen P ( 1998 ) . An efficient Fourier method for 3 -D radon inversion in exact cone -beam CT reconstruction. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 17, 244 ± 250.
  17. Qiu HH, Cofer GP, Hedlund LW, and Johnson GA ( 1997 ) . Automated feedback control of body temperature for small animal studies with MR microscopy. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 44, 1107 ± 1113.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Paulus, M. J., Gleason, S. S., Kennel, S. J., Hunsicker, P. R., & Johnson, D. K.
Affiliations
Oak Ridge National Laboratory (US)
Corresponding author
Paulus, Michael J.
Venue
Neoplasia
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-01
Volume
2
Issue
1-2
Pages
62-70
ISSN
1476-5586 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2044754414
Cited by
490
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 30
FWCI
3.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neoplasia (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Energy
  • Laboratory Directed Research and Development
  • Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Radiation › Advanced X-ray Imaging Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Advanced X-ray and CT Imaging
Keywords
micro-computed tomography, small animal imaging, tumor detection, non-invasive imaging, imaging protocols, bone tumors, skeletal abnormalities, soft tissue imaging
MeSH terms
Animals, Diagnostic Imaging, Neoplasms, Experimental, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, X-Rays, Models, Statistical, Mice

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