Advancing the translation of optical imaging agents for clinical imaging
Biomedical Optics Express, ISSN: 2156-7085, Vol: 4, Issue: 1, Page: 160-170
2013
- 20Citations
- 143Usage
- 43Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations20
- Citation Indexes20
- 20
- CrossRef14
- Usage143
- Downloads138
- Abstract Views5
- Captures43
- Readers43
- 43
Article Description
Despite the development of a large number of promising candidates, few contrast agents for established medical imaging modalities have successfully been translated over the past decade. The emergence of new imaging contrast agents that employ biomedical optics is further complicated by the relative infancy of the field and the lack of approved imaging devices compared to more established clinical modalities such as nuclear medicine. Herein, we propose a navigational approach (as opposed to a fixed "roadmap") for translation of optical imaging agents that is (i) proposed through consensus by four academic research programs that are part of the cooperative U54 NCI Network for Translational Research, (ii) developed through early experiences for translating optical imaging agents in order to meet distinctly varied needs in cancer diagnostics, and (iii) adaptable to the rapidly changing environment of academic medicine. We describe the pathways by which optical imaging agents are synthesized, qualified, and validated for preclinical testing, and ultimately translated for "first-in-humans" studies using investigational optical imaging devices. By identifying and adopting consensus approaches for seemingly disparate optical imaging modalities and clinical indications, we seek to establish a systematic method for navigating the ever-changing "roadmap" to most efficiently arrive at the destination of clinical adoption and improved outcome and survivorship for cancer patients. © 2012 Optical Society of America.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84871819745&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/boe.4.000160; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23304655; https://www.osapublishing.org/boe/abstract.cfm?uri=boe-4-1-160; https://www.osapublishing.org/viewmedia.cfm?URI=boe-4-1-160&seq=0; https://opg.optica.org/boe/abstract.cfm?uri=boe-4-1-160; https://digitalcommons.wustl.edu/open_access_pubs/3551; https://digitalcommons.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4554&context=open_access_pubs; https://dx.doi.org/10.1364/boe.4.000160; https://opg.optica.org/abstract.cfm?uri=boe-4-1-160; https://opg.optica.org/viewmedia.cfm?uri=boe-4-1-160&seq=0&html=true; https://opg.optica.org/viewmedia.cfm?uri=boe-4-1-160&seq=0; http://www.opticsinfobase.org/abstract.cfm?URI=boe-4-1-160; https://www.osapublishing.org/abstract.cfm?uri=boe-4-1-160; https://www.osapublishing.org/viewmedia.cfm?uri=boe-4-1-160&seq=0&html=true; https://www.osapublishing.org/viewmedia.cfm?uri=boe-4-1-160&seq=0; https://www.osapublishing.org/abstract.cfm?URI=boe-4-1-160; https://www.osapublishing.org/boe/fulltext.cfm?uri=boe-4-1-160&id=247156
The Optical Society
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know