Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Textural indices.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Characteristics of patients.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Groups of highly correlated indices.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Textural indices correlation coefficient between themselves and with PET standard quantitative parameters (Pearson test).

More »

Table 4 Expand

Fig 1.

Variability between PET-EDGE and 40%SUVmax method.

Bland-Altman plot. (Solid blue line) Bias. (Dashed blue lines) Bias 95% confidence interval. (Dashed red lines) Difference 95% confidence interval.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Variability between DAISNE and 40%SUVmax method.

Bland-Altman plot. (Solid blue line) Bias. (Dashed blue lines) Bias 95% confidence interval. (Dashed red lines) Difference 95% confidence interval.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Variability between PET-EDGE and DAISNE method.

Bland-Altman plot. (Solid blue line) Bias. (Dashed blue lines) Bias 95% confidence interval. (Dashed red lines) Difference 95% confidence interval.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Example of VOI delineating a tumor with the 3 segmentation methods.

(Turquoise blue) PET-EDGE segmentation method. (Sky blue) DAISNE segmentation method. (Dark blue) 40%SUVmax segmentation method. (Top left) FDG PET sagittal slice. (Top right) FDG PET transverse slice. (Bottom left) FDG PET frontal slice. (Bottom right) SUV histograms. With LIFEx software.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Table 5.

Inter-segmentation method variability (Friedman and Wilcoxon test p-values).

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

Inter-observer reproducibility (intra-class correlation coefficient).

More »

Table 6 Expand