Strauss LG, Conti PS. The applications of PET in clinical oncology. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 1991;32(4):623–48.

CAS  Google Scholar 

Khalil MM. Basics and advances of quantitative PET imaging. In: Khalil MM, editor. Basic science of PET imaging. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2017. p. 303–22.

Chapter  Google Scholar 

Sokoloff L, Reivich M, Kennedy C, Des Rosiers MH, Patlak CS, Pettigrew KD, et al. The [14C]deoxyglucose method for the measurement of local cerebral glucose utilization: theory, procedure, and normal values in the conscious and anesthetized albino rat. J Neurochem. 1977;28(5):897–916.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Wang G, Rahmim A, Gunn RN. PET parametric imaging: past, present, and future. IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci. 2020;4(6):663–75.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Gallezot JD, Lu Y, Naganawa M, Carson RE. Parametric imaging with PET and SPECT. IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci. 2020;4(1):1–23.

Article  Google Scholar 

Lecoq P. Pushing the limits in time-of-flight PET imaging. IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci. 2017;1(6):473–85.

Article  Google Scholar 

Rahmim A, Lodge MA, Karakatsanis NA, Panin VY, Zhou Y, McMillan A, et al. Dynamic whole-body PET imaging: principles, potentials and applications. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Biol. 2019;46:501–18.

Article  Google Scholar 

Surti S, Pantel AR, Karp JS. Total body PET: why, how, what for? IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci. 2020;4(3):283–92.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Meikle SR, Sossi V, Roncali E, Cherry SR, Banati R, Mankoff D, Jones T, James M, Sutcliffe J, Ouyang J, Petibon Y. Quantitative PET in the 2020s: a roadmap. Phys Med Biol. 2021;66(6):06RM01.

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Pan L, Sachpekidis C. Kinetic modeling and parametric imaging with dynamic PET for oncological applications: general considerations, current clinical applications, and future perspectives. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Biol. 2021;48:21–39.

Article  Google Scholar 

Dias AH, Pedersen MF, Danielsen H, Munk OL, Gormsen LC. Clinical feasibility and impact of fully automated multiparametric PET imaging using direct Patlak reconstruction: evaluation of 103 dynamic whole-body 18 F-FDG PET/CT scans. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Biol. 2021;48:837–50.

Article  Google Scholar 

Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Pan L, Strauss LG. Quantitative approaches of dynamic FDG-PET and PET/CT studies (dPET/CT) for the evaluation of oncological patients. Cancer Imaging. 2012;12(1):283.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Gupta N, Gill H, Graeber G, Bishop H, Hurst J, Stephens T. Dynamic positron emission tomography with F-18 Fluorodeoxyglucose imaging in differentiation of benign from malignant lung/mediastinal lesions. Chest. 1998;114(4):1105–11.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Römer W, Hanauske A-R, Ziegler S, Thödtmann R, Weber W, Fuchs C, et al. Positron emission tomography in non-hodgkin’s lymphoma: assessment of chemotherapy with fluorodeoxyglucose. Blood. 1998;91(12):4464–71.

PubMed  Google Scholar 

Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Strauss LG, Schwarzbach M, Burger C, Heichel T, Willeke F, Mechtersheimer G, Lehnert T. Dynamic PET 18F-FDG studies in patients with primary and recurrent soft-tissue sarcomas: impact on diagnosis and correlation with grading. J Nucl Med. 2001;42(5):713–20.

CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Strauss LG, Heichel T, Wu H, Burger C, Bernd L, et al. The role of quantitative (18)F-FDG PET studies for the differentiation of malignant and benign bone lesions. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2002;43(4):510–8.

Google Scholar 

Rusten E, Rødal J, Revheim ME, Skretting A, Bruland OS, Malinen E. Quantitative dynamic 18FDG-PET and tracer kinetic analysis of soft tissue sarcomas. Acta Oncol. 2013;52(6):1160–7.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Strauss LG, Klippel S, Pan L, Schönleben K, Haberkorn U, Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A. Assessment of quantitative FDG PET data in primary colorectal tumours: which parameters are important with respect to tumour detection? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34(6):868–77.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Gunn RN, Slifstein M, Searle GE, Price JC. Quantitative imaging of protein targets in the human brain with PET. Phys Med Biol. 2015;60(22):R363-411.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Kimura N, Yamamoto Y, Kameyama R, Hatakeyama T, Kawai N, Nishiyama Y. Diagnostic value of kinetic analysis using dynamic 18F-FDG-PET in patients with malignant primary brain tumor. Nucl Med Commun. 2009;30(8):602–9.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A. PET-based molecular imaging in personalized oncology: potential of the assessment of therapeutic outcome. Future Oncol. 2015;11(7):1083–91.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Nishiyama Y, Yamamoto Y, Monden T, Sasakawa Y, Kawai N, Satoh K, et al. Diagnostic value of kinetic analysis using dynamic FDG PET in immunocompetent patients with primary CNS lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34(1):78–86.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Kawai N, Nishiyama Y, Miyake K, Tamiya T, Nagao S. Evaluation of tumor FDG transport and metabolism in primary central nervous system lymphoma using [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) kinetic analysis. Ann Nucl Med. 2005;19(8):685–90.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Stender J, Kupers R, Rodell A, Thibaut A, Chatelle C, Bruno M-A, et al. Quantitative rates of brain glucose metabolism distinguish minimally conscious from vegetative state patients. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2015;35(1):58–65.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Madsen K, Hesby S, Poulsen I, Fuglsang S, Graff J, Larsen KB, et al. Comparison of analytical methods of brain [(18)F]FDG-PET after severe traumatic brain injury. J Neurosci Methods. 2017;291:176–81.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Petersen RC, Stevens JC, Ganguli M, Tangalos EG, Cummings JL, DeKosky ST. Practice parameter: early detection of dementia: Mild cognitive impairment (an evidence-based review)[RETIRED]: Report of the quality standards subcommittee of the American academy of neurology. Neurology. 2001;56(9):1133–42.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Mosconi L, Tsui WH, Rusinek H, De Santi S, Li Y, Wang G-J, et al. Quantitation, regional vulnerability, and kinetic modeling of brain glucose metabolism in mild Alzheimer’s disease. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34(9):1467–79.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Doot RK, McDonald ES, Mankoff DA. Role of PET quantitation in the monitoring of cancer response to treatment: review of approaches and human clinical trials. Clin Transl Imaging. 2014;2(4):295–303.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Kotasidis FA, Tsoumpas C, Rahmim A. Advanced kinetic modelling strategies: towards adoption in clinical PET imaging. Clinic Trans Imaging. 2014;2:219–37.

Article  Google Scholar 

Krupinski EA. Current perspectives in medical image perception. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2010;72(5):1205–17.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Sari H, Eriksson L, Mingels C, Alberts I, Casey ME, Afshar-Oromieh A, et al. Feasibility of using abbreviated scan protocols with population-based input functions for accurate kinetic modeling of [18F]-FDG datasets from a long axial FOV PET scanner. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2023;50(2):257–65.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Chim H, Bakri K, Moran SL. Complications related to radial artery occlusion, radial artery harvest, and arterial lines. Hand Clin. 2015;31(1):93–100.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Choi Y, Hawkins RA, Huang SC, Gambhir SS, Brunken RC, Phelps ME, et al. Parametric images of myocardial metabolic rate of glucose generated from dynamic cardiac PET and 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose studies. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 1991;32(4):733–8.

CAS  Google Scholar 

van der Weerdt AP, Klein LJ, Boellaard R, Visser CA, Visser FC, Lammertsma AA. Image-derived input functions for determination of MRGlu in cardiac (18)F-FDG PET scans. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2001;42(11):1622–9.

Google Scholar 

Lüdemann L, Sreenivasa G, Michel R, Rosner C, Plotkin M, Felix R, et al. Corrections of arterial input function for dynamic H215O PET to assess perfusion of pelvic tumours: arterial blood sampling versus image extraction. Phys Med Biol. 2006;51(11):2883–900.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Ohtake T, Kosaka N, Watanabe T, Yokoyama I, Moritan T, Masuo M, et al. Noninvasive method to obtain input function for measuring tissue glucose utilization of thoracic and abdominal organs. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 1991;32(7):1432–8.

CAS  Google Scholar 

Zanotti-Fregonara P, Chen K, Liow JS, Fujita M, Innis RB. Image-derived input function for brain PET studies: many challenges and few opportunities. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2011;31(10):1986–98.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Zanotti-Fregonara P, el Fadaili M, Maroy R, Comtat C, Souloumiac A, Jan S, et al. Comparison of eight methods for the estimation of the image-derived input function in dynamic [(18)F]-FDG PET human brain studies. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2009;29(11):1825–35.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Feng T, Tsui BM, Li X, Vranesic M, Lodge MA, Gulaldi NC, et al. Image-derived and arterial blood sampled input functions for quantitative PET imaging of the angiotensin II subtype 1 receptor in the kidney. Med Phys. 2015;42(11):6736–44.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Sari H, Mingels C, Alberts I, Hu J, Buesser D, Shah V, et al. First results on kinetic modelling and parametric imaging of dynamic 18F-FDG datasets from a long axial FOV PET scanner in oncological patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2022;49(6):1997–2009.