Download PDF
Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2023; 27(06): 632-640
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1775746
Review Article

EXPLORing Arthritis with Total-body Positron Emission Tomography

Abhijit J. Chaudhari
1   Department of Radiology, University of California, Davis, Davis, California
,
Yasser G. Abdelhafez
1   Department of Radiology, University of California, Davis, Davis, California
2   Nuclear Medicine Unit, South Egypt Cancer Institute, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt
,
Lorenzo Nardo
1   Department of Radiology, University of California, Davis, Davis, California
,
Siba P. Raychaudhuri
3   Department of Internal Medicine – Rheumatology, University of California, Davis, Davis, California
4   Northern California Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Mather, California
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Arthritis has significant adverse consequences on musculoskeletal tissues and often other organs of the body. Current methods for clinical evaluation of arthritis are suboptimal, and biomarkers that are objective and measurable indicators for monitoring of arthritis disease activity are in critical demand. Recently, total-body positron emission tomography (PET) has been developed that can collect imaging signals synchronously from the entire body at ultra-low doses and reduced scan times. These scanners have increased signal collection efficiency that overcomes several limitations of standard PET scanners in the evaluation of arthritis, and they may potentially provide biomarkers to assess local and systemic impact of the arthritis disease process. This article reviews current results from using total-body PET in the assessment of common arthritic conditions, and it outlines future opportunities and challenges.

Keywords

total-body positron emission tomography - rheumatoid arthritis - psoriatic arthritis - osteoarthritis - molecular imaging


Publication History

Article published online:
07 November 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Barbour KE, Helmick CG, Boring M, Brady TJ. Vital signs: prevalence of doctor-diagnosed arthritis and arthritis-attributable activity limitation—United States, 2013-2015. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2017; 66 (09) 246-253
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Brennan-Olsen SL, Cook S, Leech MT. et al. Prevalence of arthritis according to age, sex and socioeconomic status in six low and middle income countries: analysis of data from the World Health Organization study on global AGEing and adult health (SAGE) Wave 1. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2017; 18 (01) 271
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 United States Bone and Joint Initiative. The Burden of Musculoskeletal Diseases in the United States (BMUS). 4th ed. 2020. Available at: http://www.boneandjointburden.orgexternal Accessed July 29, 2023
    PubMed
  • 4 Luque Ramos A, Redeker I, Hoffmann F, Callhoff J, Zink A, Albrecht K. Comorbidities in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and their association with patient-reported outcomes: results of claims data linked to questionnaire survey. J Rheumatol 2019; 46 (06) 564-571
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Husni ME, Merola JF, Davin S. The psychosocial burden of psoriatic arthritis. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2017; 47 (03) 351-360
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Favalli EG, Biggioggero M, Crotti C, Becciolini A, Raimondo MG, Meroni PL. Sex and management of rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Rev Allergy Immunol 2019; 56 (03) 333-345
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Srikanth VK, Fryer JL, Zhai G, Winzenberg TM, Hosmer D, Jones G. A meta-analysis of sex differences prevalence, incidence and severity of osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2005; 13 (09) 769-781
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Iragorri N, Hazlewood G, Manns B, Danthurebandara V, Spackman E. Psoriatic arthritis screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2019; 58 (04) 692-707
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Smolen JS, Aletaha D, McInnes IB. Rheumatoid arthritis. Lancet 2016; 388 (10055): 2023-2038
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Rida MA, Chandran V. Challenges in the clinical diagnosis of psoriatic arthritis. Clin Immunol 2020; 214: 108390
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Zhang R, Yang X, Wang J. et al. Identification of potential biomarkers for differential diagnosis between rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis via integrative genome-wide gene expression profiling analysis. Mol Med Rep 2019; 19 (01) 30-40
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Harnden K, Pease C, Jackson A. Rheumatoid arthritis. BMJ 2016; 352: i387
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Verweij CL. Predicting the future of anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy. Arthritis Res Ther 2009; 11 (03) 115
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Evangelisto A, Wakefield R, Emery P. Imaging in early arthritis. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2004; 18 (06) 927-943
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Roemer FW, Guermazi A, Trattnig S. et al. Whole joint MRI assessment of surgical cartilage repair of the knee: Cartilage Repair OsteoArthritis Knee Score (CROAKS). Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2014; 22 (06) 779-799
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Takase K, Ohno S, Takeno M. et al. Simultaneous evaluation of long-lasting knee synovitis in patients undergoing arthroplasty by power Doppler ultrasonography and contrast-enhanced MRI in comparison with histopathology. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2012; 30 (01) 85-92
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Michelsen B, Diamantopoulos AP, Soldal DM, Hammer HB, Kavanaugh A, Haugeberg G. Achilles enthesitis defined by ultrasound is not associated with clinical enthesitis in patients with psoriatic arthritis. RMD Open 2017; 3 (02) e000486
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Singla S, Eder L, Kaeley G, Aydin SZ. The use and availability of musculoskeletal ultrasonography for psoriatic disease among group for research and assessment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis members and the unmet needs. Clin Ther 2023; S0149-2918 (23)00199-6
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Coates LC, Hodgson R, Conaghan PG, Freeston JE. MRI and ultrasonography for diagnosis and monitoring of psoriatic arthritis. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2012; 26 (06) 805-822
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Poggenborg RP, Pedersen SJ, Eshed I. et al. Head-to-toe whole-body MRI in psoriatic arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis and healthy subjects: first steps towards global inflammation and damage scores of peripheral and axial joints. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2015; 54 (06) 1039-1049
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Krabbe S, Eshed I, Gandjbakhch F. et al; OMERACT MRI in Arthritis Working Group. Development and Validation of an OMERACT MRI Whole-Body Score for Inflammation in Peripheral Joints and Entheses in Inflammatory Arthritis (MRI-WIPE). J Rheumatol 2019; 46 (09) 1215-1221
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Husic R, Gretler J, Felber A. et al. Disparity between ultrasound and clinical findings in psoriatic arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2014; 73 (08) 1529-1536
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Fassio A, Matzneller P, Idolazzi L. Recent advances in imaging for diagnosis, monitoring, and prognosis of psoriatic arthritis. Front Med (Lausanne) 2020; 7: 551684
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Roivainen A, Parkkola R, Yli-Kerttula T. et al. Use of positron emission tomography with methyl-11C-choline and 2-18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose in comparison with magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of inflammatory proliferation of synovium. Arthritis Rheum 2003; 48 (11) 3077-3084
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 van der Laken CJ, Elzinga EH, Kropholler MA. et al. Noninvasive imaging of macrophages in rheumatoid synovitis using 11C-(R)-PK11195 and positron emission tomography. Arthritis Rheum 2008; 58 (11) 3350-3355
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Verweij NJF, Yaqub M, Bruijnen STG. et al. First in man study of [18F]fluoro-PEG-folate PET: a novel macrophage imaging technique to visualize rheumatoid arthritis. Sci Rep 2020; 10 (01) 1047
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Shrestha S, Kim MJ, Eldridge M. et al. PET measurement of cyclooxygenase-2 using a novel radioligand: upregulation in primate neuroinflammation and first-in-human study. J Neuroinflammation 2020; 17 (01) 140
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Dietz M, Nicod Lalonde M, Omoumi P, Testart Dardel N, Hügle T, Prior JO. Imaging of ανβ3 integrin expression in rheumatoid arthritis with [68Ga]Ga-NODAGA-RGDyk PET/CT in comparison to [18F]FDG PET/CT. Med Nucl (Paris) 2021; 45 (5–6): 293-295
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Zhu Z, Yin Y, Zheng K. et al. Evaluation of synovial angiogenesis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis using 68Ga-PRGD2 PET/CT: a prospective proof-of-concept cohort study. Ann Rheum Dis 2014; 73 (06) 1269-1272
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Viitanen R, Moisio O, Lankinen P. et al. First-in-humans study of 68Ga-DOTA-Siglec-9, a PET ligand targeting vascular adhesion protein 1. J Nucl Med 2021; 62 (04) 577-583
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Watanabe T, Takase-Minegishi K, Ihata A. et al. (18)F-FDG and (18)F-NaF PET/CT demonstrate coupling of inflammation and accelerated bone turnover in rheumatoid arthritis. Mod Rheumatol 2016; 26 (02) 180-187
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Park HJ, Chang SH, Lee JW, Lee SM. Clinical utility of F-18 sodium fluoride PET/CT for estimating disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Quant Imaging Med Surg 2021; 11 (04) 1156-1169
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Narayan N, Owen DR, Taylor PC. Advances in positron emission tomography for the imaging of rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2017; 56 (11) 1837-1846
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Mountz JM, Alavi A, Mountz JD. Emerging optical and nuclear medicine imaging methods in rheumatoid arthritis. Nat Rev Rheumatol 2012; 8 (12) 719-728
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Cherry SR, Badawi RD, Karp JS, Moses WW, Price P, Jones T. Total-body imaging: transforming the role of positron emission tomography. Sci Transl Med 2017; 9 (381) eaaf6169
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Badawi RD, Shi H, Hu P. et al. First human imaging studies with the EXPLORER total-body pet scanner. J Nucl Med 2019; 60 (03) 299-303
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Spencer BA, Berg E, Schmall JP. et al. Performance evaluation of the uEXPLORER total-body PET/CT scanner Based on NEMA NU 2-2018 with additional tests to characterize PET scanners with a long axial field of view. J Nucl Med 2021; 62 (06) 861-870
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Karp J, Schmall J, Geagan M. et al. Imaging performance of the PennPET Explorer scanner. J Nucl Med 2018; 59 (Suppl. 01) 222-222
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Prenosil GA, Sari H, Fürstner M. et al. Performance characteristics of the Biograph Vision Quadra PET/CT System with a long axial field of view using the NEMA NU 2-2018 standard. J Nucl Med 2022; 63 (03) 476-484
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Zhao YM, Li YH, Chen T. et al. Image quality and lesion detectability in low-dose pediatric 18F-FDG scans using total-body PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 48 (11) 3378-3385
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Zhang YQ, Hu PC, Wu RZ. et al. The image quality, lesion detectability, and acquisition time of 18F-FDG total-body PET/CT in oncological patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2020; 47 (11) 2507-2515
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Hu P, Zhang Y, Yu H. et al. Total-body 18F-FDG PET/CT scan in oncology patients: how fast could it be?. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 48 (08) 2384-2394
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Pantel AR, Viswanath V, Daube-Witherspoon ME. et al. PennPET Explorer: human imaging on a whole-body imager. J Nucl Med 2020; 61 (01) 144-151
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Alberts I, Hünermund JN, Prenosil G. et al. Clinical performance of long axial field of view PET/CT: a head-to-head intra-individual comparison of the Biograph Vision Quadra with the Biograph Vision PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 48 (08) 2395-2404
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 van Sluis J, van Snick JH, Brouwers AH. et al. Shortened duration whole body 18F-FDG PET Patlak imaging on the Biograph Vision Quadra PET/CT using a population-averaged input function. EJNMMI Phys 2022; 9 (01) 1-14
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Mannheim JG, Rausch I, Conti M, la Fougère C, Schmidt FP. Characterization of the partial volume effect along the axial field-of-view of the Biograph Vision Quadra total-body PET/CT system for multiple isotopes. EJNMMI Phys 2023; 10 (01) 33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 McInnes IB, Schett G. The pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med 2011; 365 (23) 2205-2219
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Aletaha D, Smolen JS. Diagnosis and management of rheumatoid arthritis: a review. JAMA 2018; 320 (13) 1360-1372
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Gu JT, Nguyen L, Chaudhari AJ, MacKenzie JD. Molecular characterization of rheumatoid arthritis with magnetic resonance imaging. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2011; 22 (02) 61-69
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Polisson RP, Schoenberg OI, Fischman A. et al. Use of magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography in the assessment of synovial volume and glucose metabolism in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1995; 38 (06) 819-825
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Beckers C, Ribbens C, André B. et al. Assessment of disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis with (18)F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2004; 45 (06) 956-964
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Chaudhari AJ, Ferrero A, Godinez F. et al. High-resolution (18)F-FDG PET/CT for assessing disease activity in rheumatoid and psoriatic arthritis: findings of a prospective pilot study. Br J Radiol 2016; 89 (1063): 20160138
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Chaudhari AJ, Bowen SL, Burkett GW. et al. High-resolution (18)F-FDG PET with MRI for monitoring response to treatment in rheumatoid arthritis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010; 37 (05) 1047
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Kubota K, Ito K, Morooka M. et al. FDG PET for rheumatoid arthritis: basic considerations and whole-body PET/CT. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2011; 1228: 29-38
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Yamashita H, Kubota K, Mimori A. Clinical value of whole-body PET/CT in patients with active rheumatic diseases. Arthritis Res Ther 2014; 16 (05) 423
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Kubota K, Yamashita H, Mimori A. Clinical value of FDG-PET/CT for the evaluation of rheumatic diseases: rheumatoid arthritis, polymyalgia rheumatica, and relapsing polychondritis. Semin Nucl Med 2017; 47 (04) 408-424
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Fosse P, Kaiser MJ, Namur G, de Seny D, Malaise MG, Hustinx R. 18F- FDG PET/CT joint assessment of early therapeutic response in rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with rituximab. Eur J Hybrid Imaging 2018; 2 (01) 6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Prevoo ML, van 't Hof MA, Kuper HH, van Leeuwen MA, van de Putte LB, van Riel PL. Modified disease activity scores that include twenty-eight-joint counts. Development and validation in a prospective longitudinal study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1995; 38 (01) 44-48
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Hammer HB, Michelsen B, Provan SA. et al. Tender joint count and inflammatory activity in patients with established rheumatoid arthritis: results from a longitudinal study. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2020; 72 (01) 27-35
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Hammer HB, Michelsen B, Sexton J. et al. Swollen, but not tender joints, are independently associated with ultrasound synovitis: results from a longitudinal observational study of patients with established rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2019; 78 (09) 1179-1185
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Hammer HB, Jensen Hansen IM, Järvinen P. et al. Rheumatoid arthritis patients with predominantly tender joints rarely achieve clinical remission despite being in ultrasound remission. Rheumatol Adv Pract 2021; 5 (02) rkab030
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Abdelhafez Y, Raychaudhuri SP, Mazza D. et al. Total-body 18F-FDG PET/CT in autoimmune inflammatory arthritis at ultra-low dose: initial observations. J Nucl Med 2022; 63 (10) 1579-1585
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Ritchlin CT, Colbert RA, Gladman DD. Psoriatic arthritis. N Engl J Med 2017; 376 (10) 957-970
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Gladman DD. Clinical features and diagnostic considerations in psoriatic arthritis. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 2015; 41 (04) 569-579
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Raychaudhuri SP, Wilken R, Sukhov AC, Raychaudhuri SK, Maverakis E. Management of psoriatic arthritis: early diagnosis, monitoring of disease severity and cutting edge therapies. J Autoimmun 2017; 76: 21-37
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Wakefield RJ, Green MJ, Marzo-Ortega H. et al. Should oligoarthritis be reclassified? Ultrasound reveals a high prevalence of subclinical disease. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63 (04) 382-385
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Mease PJ, Gladman DD, Papp KA. et al. Prevalence of rheumatologist-diagnosed psoriatic arthritis in patients with psoriasis in European/North American dermatology clinics. J Am Acad Dermatol 2013; 69 (05) 729-735
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Chandran V, Abji F, Perruccio AV. et al. Serum-based soluble markers differentiate psoriatic arthritis from osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2019; 78 (06) 796-801
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Van Hal TW, Mulder MLM, Wenink MH. et al. Discovery of Psoriatic Arthritis in Psoriasis Patients for Early Rheumatological Referral (DAPPER) Study: a prospective observational cohort. Acta Derm Venereol 2022; 102: adv00768
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 McGonagle D, Hermann KG, Tan AL. Differentiation between osteoarthritis and psoriatic arthritis: implications for pathogenesis and treatment in the biologic therapy era. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2015; 54 (01) 29-38
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Wahl RL, Dilsizian V, Palestro CJ. At last, 18F-FDG for inflammation and infection!. J Nucl Med 2021; 62 (08) 1048-1049
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Basu S, Zhuang H, Torigian DA, Rosenbaum J, Chen W, Alavi A. Functional imaging of inflammatory diseases using nuclear medicine techniques. Semin Nucl Med 2009; 39 (02) 124-145
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Felbo SK, Wiell C, Østergaard M. et al. Do tender joints in active psoriatic arthritis reflect inflammation assessed by ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging?. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2022; 61 (02) 723-733
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 74 Hunter DJ, Collins JE, Deveza L, Hoffmann SC, Kraus VB. Biomarkers in osteoarthritis: current status and outlook - the FNIH Biomarkers Consortium PROGRESS OA study. Skeletal Radiol 2023 January 24 (Epub ahead of print)
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 75 Collins JE, Losina E, Nevitt MC. et al. Semiquantitative imaging biomarkers of knee osteoarthritis progression: data from the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health Osteoarthritis Biomarkers Consortium. Arthritis Rheumatol 2016; 68 (10) 2422-2431
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 76 Jarraya M, Roemer FW, Bäuerle T, Kogan F, Guermazi A. PET imaging in osteoarthritis. PET Clin 2023; 18 (01) 21-29
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 77 Jena A, Taneja S, Rana P. et al. Emerging role of integrated PET-MRI in osteoarthritis. Skeletal Radiol 2021; 50 (12) 2349-2363
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 78 Abdelhafez YG, Nardo L, Cherry SR, Badawi RD, Chaudhari AJ. 18F-Fluciclovine PET uptake in thumb carpometacarpal joint: initial observations. Paper presented at: Orthopaedics Research Society Annual Meeting; February 2–5, 2019; Austin, TX
    PubMed
  • 79 Wu C, Li F, Niu G, Chen X. PET imaging of inflammation biomarkers. Theranostics 2013; 3 (07) 448-466
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 80 Yoon D, Kogan F, Gold GE, Biswal S. Identifying musculoskeletal pain generators using clinical PET. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2020; 24 (04) 441-450
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 81 Qi J, Matej S, Wang G, Zhang X. 3D/4D Reconstruction and quantitative total body imaging. PET Clin 2021; 16 (01) 41-54
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 82 Jiang J, Hua J, Wang H. et al. A virtual-pinhole PET device for improving contrast recovery and enhancing lesion detectability of a one-meter-long PET scanner: a simulation study. Phys Med Biol 2023;68)(14):
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 83 Shiyam Sundar LK, Lassen ML, Gutschmayer S. et al. Fully automated, fast motion correction of dynamic whole-body and total-body PET/CT imaging studies. J Nucl Med 2023; 64 (07) 1145-1153
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 84 Li EJ, Spencer BA, Schmall JP. et al. Efficient delay correction for total-body PET kinetic modeling using pulse timing methods. J Nucl Med 2022; 63 (08) 1266-1273
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 85 Richards JS, Dowell SM, Quinones ME, Kerr GS. How to use biologic agents in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who have comorbid disease. BMJ 2015; 351: h3658
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 86 Humphreys J, Hyrich K, Symmons D. What is the impact of biologic therapies on common co-morbidities in patients with rheumatoid arthritis?. Arthritis Res Ther 2016; 18 (01) 282
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar