Lammertsma AA (2017) Forward to the past: the case for quantitative PET imaging. J Nucl Med 58:1019–1024

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Boellaard R, Delgado-Bolton R, Oyen WJ et al (2015) FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 42:328–354

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Tomasi G, Turkheimer F, Aboagye E (2012) Importance of quantification for the analysis of PET data in oncology: review of current methods and trends for the future. Mol Imaging Biol 14:131–146

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Wang D, Zhang X, Liu H et al (2022) Assessing dynamic metabolic heterogeneity in non-small cell lung cancer patients via ultra-high sensitivity total-body [F]FDG PET/CT imaging: quantitative analysis of [F]FDG uptake in primary tumors and metastatic lymph nodes. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 49:4692–4704

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Hamberg LM, Hunter GJ, Alpert NM et al (1994) The dose uptake ratio as an index of glucose metabolism: useful parameter or oversimplification? J Nucl Med 35:1308–1312

CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Zaidi H, Karakatsanis N (2018) Towards enhanced PET quantification in clinical oncology. Br J Radiol 91:20170508

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Rahmim A, Lodge MA, Karakatsanis NA et al (2019) Dynamic whole-body PET imaging: principles, potentials and applications. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 46:501–518

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Keyes JW Jr (1995) SUV: standard uptake or silly useless value? J Nucl Med 36:1836–1839

PubMed  Google Scholar 

Huang SC (2000) Anatomy of SUV. Standardized uptake value. Nucl Med Biol 27:643–646

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Adams MC, Turkington TG, Wilson JM et al (2010) A systematic review of the factors affecting accuracy of SUV measurements. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195:310–320

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Phelps ME, Huang SC, Hoffman EJ et al (1979) Tomographic measurement of local cerebral glucose metabolic rate in humans with (F-18)2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose: validation of method. Ann Neurol 6:371–388

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Sari H, Mingels C, Alberts I et al (2022) 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 49:1997–2009

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Dias AH, Pedersen MF, Danielsen H et al (2021) Clinical feasibility and impact of fully automated multiparametric PET imaging using direct Patlak reconstruction: evaluation of 103 dynamic whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT scans. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 48:837–850

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Patlak CS, Blasberg RG, Fenstermacher JD (1983) Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants from multiple-time uptake data. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 3:1–7

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Wang G, Fu L, Qi J (2008) Maximum a posteriori reconstruction of the Patlak parametric image from sinograms in dynamic PET. Phys Med Biol 53:593–604

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Laffon E, Marthan R (2021) Is Patlak y-intercept a relevant metrics? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 48:1287–1290

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL et al (2021) Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin 71:209–249

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Shreve PD, Anzai Y, Wahl RL (1999) Pitfalls in oncologic diagnosis with FDG PET imaging: physiologic and benign variants. Radiographics 19:61–77

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Asad S, Aquino SL, Piyavisetpat N et al (2004) False-positive FDG positron emission tomography uptake in nonmalignant chest abnormalities. AJR Am J Roentgenol 182:983–989

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Higashi K, Ueda Y, Seki H et al (1998) Fluorine-18-FDG PET imaging is negative in bronchioloalveolar lung carcinoma. J Nucl Med 39:1016–1020

CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Tamaki N, Kotani T, Nishimura M et al (2022) Dynamic whole-body FDG-PET imaging for oncology studies. Clin Transl Imaging 10:249–258

Article  Google Scholar 

Zaker N, Kotasidis F, Garibotto V et al (2020) Assessment of Lesion Detectability in Dynamic Whole-Body PET Imaging Using Compartmental and Patlak Parametric Mapping. Clin Nucl Med 45:e221–e231

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Fahrni G, Karakatsanis NA, Di Domenicantonio G et al (2019) Does whole-body Patlak 18F-FDG PET imaging improve lesion detectability in clinical oncology? Eur Radiol 29:4812–4821

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Yang M, Lin Z, Xu Z et al (2020) Influx rate constant of 18F-FDG increases in metastatic lymph nodes of non-small cell lung cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 47:1198–1208

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Karakatsanis NA, Lodge MA, Tahari AK et al (2013) Dynamic whole-body PET parametric imaging: I. Concept, acquisition protocol optimization and clinical application. Phys Med Biol 58:7391–7418

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Karakatsanis NA, Lodge MA, Zhou Y et al (2013) Dynamic whole-body PET parametric imaging: II. Task-oriented statistical estimation Phys Med Biol 58:7419–7445

PubMed  Google Scholar 

Manca G, Vanzi E, Rubello D et al (2016) (18)F-FDG PET/CT quantification in head and neck squamous cell cancer: principles, technical issues and clinical applications. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 43:1360–1375

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Gupta N, Gill H, Graeber G et al (1998) Dynamic positron emission tomography with F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose imaging in differentiation of benign from malignant lung/mediastinal lesions. Chest 114:1105–1111

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Zhuang H, Pourdehnad M, Lambright ES et al (2001) Dual time point 18F-FDG PET imaging for differentiating malignant from inflammatory processes. J Nucl Med 42:1412–1417

CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Matthies A, Hickeson M, Cuchiara A et al (2002) Dual time point 18F-FDG PET for the evaluation of pulmonary nodules. J Nucl Med 43:871–875

PubMed  Google Scholar 

Huang YE, Lu HI, Liu FY et al (2012) Solitary pulmonary nodules differentiated by dynamic F-18 FDG PET in a region with high prevalence of granulomatous disease. J Radiat Res 53:306–312

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Nishimura M, Tamaki N, Matsushima S et al (2020) Dynamic whole-body 18F-FDG PET for differentiating abnormal lesions from physiological uptake. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 47:2293–2300

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Coello C, Fisk M, Mohan D et al (2017) Quantitative analysis of dynamic 18F-FDG PET/CT for measurement of lung inflammation. EJNMMI Res 7:47

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Freedman NM, Sundaram SK, Kurdziel K et al (2003) Comparison of SUV and Patlak slope for monitoring of cancer therapy using serial PET scans. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 30:46–53

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Zhu W, Li Q, Bai B et al (2014) Patlak image estimation from dual time-point list-mode PET data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 33:913–924

Article