Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 318

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reproducibility of Tumor Uptake Heterogeneity Characterization Through Textural Feature Analysis in 18F-FDG PET

Open access
Tixier, Florent, Hatt, Mathieu, Le Rest, Catherine Cheze, Le Pogam, Adrien, Corcos, Laurent, Visvikis, Dimitris·2012·Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Abstract

UNLABELLED: (18)F-FDG PET measurement of standardized uptake value (SUV) is increasingly used for monitoring therapy response and predicting outcome. Alternative parameters computed through textural analysis were recently proposed to quantify the heterogeneity of tracer uptake by tumors as a significant predictor of response. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the reproducibility of these heterogeneity measurements. METHODS: Double baseline (18)F-FDG PET scans were acquired within 4 d of each other for 16 patients before any treatment was considered. A Bland-Altman analysis was performed on 8 parameters based on histogram measurements and 17 parameters based on textural heterogeneity features after discretization with values between 8 and 128. RESULTS: The reproducibility of maximum and mean SUV was similar to that in previously reported studies, with a mean percentage difference of 4.7% ± 19.5% and 5.5% ± 21.2%, respectively. By comparison, better reproducibility was measured for some textural features describing local heterogeneity of tracer uptake, such as entropy and homogeneity, with a mean percentage difference of -2% ± 5.4% and 1.8% ± 11.5%, respectively. Several regional heterogeneity parameters such as variability in the intensity and size of regions of homogeneous activity distribution had reproducibility similar to that of SUV measurements, with 95% confidence intervals of -22.5% to 3.1% and -1.1% to 23.5%, respectively. These parameters were largely insensitive to the discretization range. CONCLUSION: Several parameters derived from textural analysis describing heterogeneity of tracer uptake by tumors on local and regional scales had reproducibility similar to or better than that of simple SUV measurements. These reproducibility results suggest that these (18)F-FDG PET-derived parameters, which have already been shown to have predictive and prognostic value in certain cancer models, may be used to monitor therapy response and predict patient outcome.

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 · 10.2967/jnumed.111.099127

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 318

Metadata

Authors
Tixier, F., Hatt, M., Le Rest, C. C., Le Pogam, A., Corcos, L., & Visvikis, D.
Venue
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Published
2012-03-27
Volume
53
Issue
5
Pages
693-700
ISSN
  • 0161-5505 (ISSN-L)
  • 2159-662X
OpenAlex
W2099835501
Cited by
318
References
2
FWCI
14.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Reproducibility of Tumor Uptake Heterogeneity Characterization Through Textural Feature Analysis in 18F-FDG PET. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2967/jnumed.111.099127
The paper
Tixier, F., Hatt, M., Le Rest, C. C., Le Pogam, A., Corcos, L., & Visvikis, D. (2012). Reproducibility of Tumor Uptake Heterogeneity Characterization Through Textural Feature Analysis in 18F-FDG PET. Journal of Nuclear Medicine. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.111.099127

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.