Test–retest repeatability of quantitative bone SPECT/CT
Objective Technological innovations in single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) have enabled a more accurate quantitative evaluation of the uptake, and the standardized uptake value (SUV) can be measured as a semi-quantitative value, as in positron emission tomography. Nevertheless, the re...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Annals of nuclear medicine 2021-03, Vol.35 (3), p.338-346 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 346 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 338 |
| container_title | Annals of nuclear medicine |
| container_volume | 35 |
| creator | Yamane, Tomohiko Fukushima, Kenji Shirotake, Suguru Nishimoto, Koshiro Okabe, Takashi Oyama, Masafumi Seto, Akira Kuji, Ichiei |
| description | Objective
Technological innovations in single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) have enabled a more accurate quantitative evaluation of the uptake, and the standardized uptake value (SUV) can be measured as a semi-quantitative value, as in positron emission tomography. Nevertheless, the reliability of the SUV of bone SPECT has not been well established. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the test–retest repeatability of the SUV of bone SPECT/CT in clinical settings.
Methods
This prospective study recruited patients with prostate cancer planning to receive bone SPECT/CT for the evaluation of bone abnormality between August 2017 and September 2019. Bone images were acquired twice by an integrated SPECT/CT scanner (Symbia Intevo, Siemens) within a 4- to 10-day interval. The maximum SUV (SUVmax) and peak SUV (SUVpeak) were calculated for the volumes of interests on the normal bone areas, degeneration/fracture lesions, and metastatic lesions. To determine repeatability, we calculated statistical indicators, including intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), repeatability coefficient (RC), and mean absolute percentage difference (MAPD). For the ICC, the 95% confidential interval (CI) was also calculated, and an ICC of ≥ 0.8 was defined as an almost perfect correlation.
Results
Twelve male patients were enrolled in the study (58–86 years; median, 71 years), and a total of 229 volumes of the interest were included in the analyses. The ICCs were 0.968 [95% CI (0.959, 0.975)] for SUVmax and 0.976 [95% CI (0.969, 0.981)] for SUVpeak. The RCs of the relative difference were 30.7% for SUVmax and 27.6% for SUVpeak, and the MAPDs (± standardized deviation) of all lesions were 12.3 ± 9.9% for SUVmax and 11.5 ± 8.3% for SUVpeak. The RCs and the MAPDs showed comparable value with the previous report regarding repeatability studies on PET.
Conclusion
An almost perfect correlation was demonstrated by repeated SUVmax and SUVpeak measured by quantitative integrated SPECT/CT. The quantitative values could be reliable indicators in patient management. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s12149-020-01568-2 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2475398326</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2475398326</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c399t-83093d740beb1ef64600c856d84549b47ee287fe2e6395e894d65f5386996af83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMtKw0AUhgdRbK2-gAsJuHETO_fMLCXUCxQUjOthkpxISpvUmUToznfwDX0Sx6YquHA1B-Y7__n5EDol-JJgnEw9oYTrGFMcYyKkiukeGhMleSw5Y_tojDXhcUJUMkJH3i8wpkooeohGjHGMCVdjpDPw3cfbu4MuDJGDNdjO5vWy7jZRW0UvvW26urNd_QpR3jYQPT7M0myaZsfooLJLDye7d4KermdZehvP72_u0qt5XDCtu1gxrFmZcJxDTqCSXGJcKCFLxQXXOU8AqEoqoCCZFqA0L6WoBFNSa2krxSboYshdu_alDyXNqvYFLJe2gbb3hvJEMK0YlQE9_4Mu2t41oV2gNJXJtswE0YEqXOu9g8qsXb2ybmMINl9izSDWBLFmK9bQsHS2i-7zFZQ_K98mA8AGwIev5hnc7-1_Yj8B6JyBgA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2492678309</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Test–retest repeatability of quantitative bone SPECT/CT</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Yamane, Tomohiko ; Fukushima, Kenji ; Shirotake, Suguru ; Nishimoto, Koshiro ; Okabe, Takashi ; Oyama, Masafumi ; Seto, Akira ; Kuji, Ichiei</creator><creatorcontrib>Yamane, Tomohiko ; Fukushima, Kenji ; Shirotake, Suguru ; Nishimoto, Koshiro ; Okabe, Takashi ; Oyama, Masafumi ; Seto, Akira ; Kuji, Ichiei</creatorcontrib><description>Objective
Technological innovations in single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) have enabled a more accurate quantitative evaluation of the uptake, and the standardized uptake value (SUV) can be measured as a semi-quantitative value, as in positron emission tomography. Nevertheless, the reliability of the SUV of bone SPECT has not been well established. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the test–retest repeatability of the SUV of bone SPECT/CT in clinical settings.
Methods
This prospective study recruited patients with prostate cancer planning to receive bone SPECT/CT for the evaluation of bone abnormality between August 2017 and September 2019. Bone images were acquired twice by an integrated SPECT/CT scanner (Symbia Intevo, Siemens) within a 4- to 10-day interval. The maximum SUV (SUVmax) and peak SUV (SUVpeak) were calculated for the volumes of interests on the normal bone areas, degeneration/fracture lesions, and metastatic lesions. To determine repeatability, we calculated statistical indicators, including intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), repeatability coefficient (RC), and mean absolute percentage difference (MAPD). For the ICC, the 95% confidential interval (CI) was also calculated, and an ICC of ≥ 0.8 was defined as an almost perfect correlation.
Results
Twelve male patients were enrolled in the study (58–86 years; median, 71 years), and a total of 229 volumes of the interest were included in the analyses. The ICCs were 0.968 [95% CI (0.959, 0.975)] for SUVmax and 0.976 [95% CI (0.969, 0.981)] for SUVpeak. The RCs of the relative difference were 30.7% for SUVmax and 27.6% for SUVpeak, and the MAPDs (± standardized deviation) of all lesions were 12.3 ± 9.9% for SUVmax and 11.5 ± 8.3% for SUVpeak. The RCs and the MAPDs showed comparable value with the previous report regarding repeatability studies on PET.
Conclusion
An almost perfect correlation was demonstrated by repeated SUVmax and SUVpeak measured by quantitative integrated SPECT/CT. The quantitative values could be reliable indicators in patient management.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0914-7187</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1864-6433</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1864-6433</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s12149-020-01568-2</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33400148</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Singapore: Springer Singapore</publisher><subject>Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Bone and Bones - diagnostic imaging ; Bone cancer ; Bone Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging ; Bone Neoplasms - secondary ; Computed tomography ; Correlation coefficients ; Degeneration ; Emission analysis ; Humans ; Image acquisition ; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted - methods ; Imaging ; Indicators ; Lesions ; Male ; Mathematical analysis ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Metastases ; Middle Aged ; Nuclear Medicine ; Original Article ; Photon emission ; Positron emission ; Positron emission tomography ; Prospective Studies ; Prostate cancer ; Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging ; Quantitative analysis ; Radiology ; Reproducibility ; Reproducibility of Results ; Single photon emission computed tomography ; Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography Computed Tomography - methods ; Tomography</subject><ispartof>Annals of nuclear medicine, 2021-03, Vol.35 (3), p.338-346</ispartof><rights>The Japanese Society of Nuclear Medicine 2021</rights><rights>The Japanese Society of Nuclear Medicine 2021.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c399t-83093d740beb1ef64600c856d84549b47ee287fe2e6395e894d65f5386996af83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c399t-83093d740beb1ef64600c856d84549b47ee287fe2e6395e894d65f5386996af83</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0955-4272</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12149-020-01568-2$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12149-020-01568-2$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33400148$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Yamane, Tomohiko</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fukushima, Kenji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shirotake, Suguru</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nishimoto, Koshiro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Okabe, Takashi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oyama, Masafumi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seto, Akira</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuji, Ichiei</creatorcontrib><title>Test–retest repeatability of quantitative bone SPECT/CT</title><title>Annals of nuclear medicine</title><addtitle>Ann Nucl Med</addtitle><addtitle>Ann Nucl Med</addtitle><description>Objective
Technological innovations in single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) have enabled a more accurate quantitative evaluation of the uptake, and the standardized uptake value (SUV) can be measured as a semi-quantitative value, as in positron emission tomography. Nevertheless, the reliability of the SUV of bone SPECT has not been well established. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the test–retest repeatability of the SUV of bone SPECT/CT in clinical settings.
Methods
This prospective study recruited patients with prostate cancer planning to receive bone SPECT/CT for the evaluation of bone abnormality between August 2017 and September 2019. Bone images were acquired twice by an integrated SPECT/CT scanner (Symbia Intevo, Siemens) within a 4- to 10-day interval. The maximum SUV (SUVmax) and peak SUV (SUVpeak) were calculated for the volumes of interests on the normal bone areas, degeneration/fracture lesions, and metastatic lesions. To determine repeatability, we calculated statistical indicators, including intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), repeatability coefficient (RC), and mean absolute percentage difference (MAPD). For the ICC, the 95% confidential interval (CI) was also calculated, and an ICC of ≥ 0.8 was defined as an almost perfect correlation.
Results
Twelve male patients were enrolled in the study (58–86 years; median, 71 years), and a total of 229 volumes of the interest were included in the analyses. The ICCs were 0.968 [95% CI (0.959, 0.975)] for SUVmax and 0.976 [95% CI (0.969, 0.981)] for SUVpeak. The RCs of the relative difference were 30.7% for SUVmax and 27.6% for SUVpeak, and the MAPDs (± standardized deviation) of all lesions were 12.3 ± 9.9% for SUVmax and 11.5 ± 8.3% for SUVpeak. The RCs and the MAPDs showed comparable value with the previous report regarding repeatability studies on PET.
Conclusion
An almost perfect correlation was demonstrated by repeated SUVmax and SUVpeak measured by quantitative integrated SPECT/CT. The quantitative values could be reliable indicators in patient management.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Bone and Bones - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Bone cancer</subject><subject>Bone Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Bone Neoplasms - secondary</subject><subject>Computed tomography</subject><subject>Correlation coefficients</subject><subject>Degeneration</subject><subject>Emission analysis</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Image acquisition</subject><subject>Image Processing, Computer-Assisted - methods</subject><subject>Imaging</subject><subject>Indicators</subject><subject>Lesions</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Mathematical analysis</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Metastases</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Nuclear Medicine</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Photon emission</subject><subject>Positron emission</subject><subject>Positron emission tomography</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Prostate cancer</subject><subject>Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Quantitative analysis</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><subject>Reproducibility</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Single photon emission computed tomography</subject><subject>Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography Computed Tomography - methods</subject><subject>Tomography</subject><issn>0914-7187</issn><issn>1864-6433</issn><issn>1864-6433</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMtKw0AUhgdRbK2-gAsJuHETO_fMLCXUCxQUjOthkpxISpvUmUToznfwDX0Sx6YquHA1B-Y7__n5EDol-JJgnEw9oYTrGFMcYyKkiukeGhMleSw5Y_tojDXhcUJUMkJH3i8wpkooeohGjHGMCVdjpDPw3cfbu4MuDJGDNdjO5vWy7jZRW0UvvW26urNd_QpR3jYQPT7M0myaZsfooLJLDye7d4KermdZehvP72_u0qt5XDCtu1gxrFmZcJxDTqCSXGJcKCFLxQXXOU8AqEoqoCCZFqA0L6WoBFNSa2krxSboYshdu_alDyXNqvYFLJe2gbb3hvJEMK0YlQE9_4Mu2t41oV2gNJXJtswE0YEqXOu9g8qsXb2ybmMINl9izSDWBLFmK9bQsHS2i-7zFZQ_K98mA8AGwIev5hnc7-1_Yj8B6JyBgA</recordid><startdate>20210301</startdate><enddate>20210301</enddate><creator>Yamane, Tomohiko</creator><creator>Fukushima, Kenji</creator><creator>Shirotake, Suguru</creator><creator>Nishimoto, Koshiro</creator><creator>Okabe, Takashi</creator><creator>Oyama, Masafumi</creator><creator>Seto, Akira</creator><creator>Kuji, Ichiei</creator><general>Springer Singapore</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0955-4272</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210301</creationdate><title>Test–retest repeatability of quantitative bone SPECT/CT</title><author>Yamane, Tomohiko ; Fukushima, Kenji ; Shirotake, Suguru ; Nishimoto, Koshiro ; Okabe, Takashi ; Oyama, Masafumi ; Seto, Akira ; Kuji, Ichiei</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c399t-83093d740beb1ef64600c856d84549b47ee287fe2e6395e894d65f5386996af83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Bone and Bones - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Bone cancer</topic><topic>Bone Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Bone Neoplasms - secondary</topic><topic>Computed tomography</topic><topic>Correlation coefficients</topic><topic>Degeneration</topic><topic>Emission analysis</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Image acquisition</topic><topic>Image Processing, Computer-Assisted - methods</topic><topic>Imaging</topic><topic>Indicators</topic><topic>Lesions</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Mathematical analysis</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Metastases</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Nuclear Medicine</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Photon emission</topic><topic>Positron emission</topic><topic>Positron emission tomography</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Prostate cancer</topic><topic>Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Quantitative analysis</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><topic>Reproducibility</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Single photon emission computed tomography</topic><topic>Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography Computed Tomography - methods</topic><topic>Tomography</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Yamane, Tomohiko</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fukushima, Kenji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shirotake, Suguru</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nishimoto, Koshiro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Okabe, Takashi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oyama, Masafumi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seto, Akira</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuji, Ichiei</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Annals of nuclear medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Yamane, Tomohiko</au><au>Fukushima, Kenji</au><au>Shirotake, Suguru</au><au>Nishimoto, Koshiro</au><au>Okabe, Takashi</au><au>Oyama, Masafumi</au><au>Seto, Akira</au><au>Kuji, Ichiei</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Test–retest repeatability of quantitative bone SPECT/CT</atitle><jtitle>Annals of nuclear medicine</jtitle><stitle>Ann Nucl Med</stitle><addtitle>Ann Nucl Med</addtitle><date>2021-03-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>35</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>338</spage><epage>346</epage><pages>338-346</pages><issn>0914-7187</issn><issn>1864-6433</issn><eissn>1864-6433</eissn><abstract>Objective
Technological innovations in single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) have enabled a more accurate quantitative evaluation of the uptake, and the standardized uptake value (SUV) can be measured as a semi-quantitative value, as in positron emission tomography. Nevertheless, the reliability of the SUV of bone SPECT has not been well established. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the test–retest repeatability of the SUV of bone SPECT/CT in clinical settings.
Methods
This prospective study recruited patients with prostate cancer planning to receive bone SPECT/CT for the evaluation of bone abnormality between August 2017 and September 2019. Bone images were acquired twice by an integrated SPECT/CT scanner (Symbia Intevo, Siemens) within a 4- to 10-day interval. The maximum SUV (SUVmax) and peak SUV (SUVpeak) were calculated for the volumes of interests on the normal bone areas, degeneration/fracture lesions, and metastatic lesions. To determine repeatability, we calculated statistical indicators, including intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), repeatability coefficient (RC), and mean absolute percentage difference (MAPD). For the ICC, the 95% confidential interval (CI) was also calculated, and an ICC of ≥ 0.8 was defined as an almost perfect correlation.
Results
Twelve male patients were enrolled in the study (58–86 years; median, 71 years), and a total of 229 volumes of the interest were included in the analyses. The ICCs were 0.968 [95% CI (0.959, 0.975)] for SUVmax and 0.976 [95% CI (0.969, 0.981)] for SUVpeak. The RCs of the relative difference were 30.7% for SUVmax and 27.6% for SUVpeak, and the MAPDs (± standardized deviation) of all lesions were 12.3 ± 9.9% for SUVmax and 11.5 ± 8.3% for SUVpeak. The RCs and the MAPDs showed comparable value with the previous report regarding repeatability studies on PET.
Conclusion
An almost perfect correlation was demonstrated by repeated SUVmax and SUVpeak measured by quantitative integrated SPECT/CT. The quantitative values could be reliable indicators in patient management.</abstract><cop>Singapore</cop><pub>Springer Singapore</pub><pmid>33400148</pmid><doi>10.1007/s12149-020-01568-2</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0955-4272</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0914-7187 |
| ispartof | Annals of nuclear medicine, 2021-03, Vol.35 (3), p.338-346 |
| issn | 0914-7187 1864-6433 1864-6433 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2475398326 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Aged Aged, 80 and over Bone and Bones - diagnostic imaging Bone cancer Bone Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging Bone Neoplasms - secondary Computed tomography Correlation coefficients Degeneration Emission analysis Humans Image acquisition Image Processing, Computer-Assisted - methods Imaging Indicators Lesions Male Mathematical analysis Medicine Medicine & Public Health Metastases Middle Aged Nuclear Medicine Original Article Photon emission Positron emission Positron emission tomography Prospective Studies Prostate cancer Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging Quantitative analysis Radiology Reproducibility Reproducibility of Results Single photon emission computed tomography Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography Computed Tomography - methods Tomography |
| title | Test–retest repeatability of quantitative bone SPECT/CT |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T08%3A26%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Test%E2%80%93retest%20repeatability%20of%20quantitative%20bone%20SPECT/CT&rft.jtitle=Annals%20of%20nuclear%20medicine&rft.au=Yamane,%20Tomohiko&rft.date=2021-03-01&rft.volume=35&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=338&rft.epage=346&rft.pages=338-346&rft.issn=0914-7187&rft.eissn=1864-6433&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s12149-020-01568-2&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2475398326%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2492678309&rft_id=info:pmid/33400148&rfr_iscdi=true |