ArticleInsights into imaging2026
Practical applications of photon-counting CT in oncology: an organ-based pictorial review.
Article in Insights into imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spectral computed tomography (CT) has become an important extension of contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) in oncologic imaging by providing material-specific information beyond conventional morphologic assessment. Dual-energy CT (DECT), implemented on energy-integrating detector CT (EID-CT) platforms, has demonstrated the value of low-keV virtual monoenergetic imaging (VMI), iodine mapping, and material decomposition for improving tumor conspicuity, delineating local extent, and supporting tissue characterization. However, broader clinical adoption of EID-CT-based DECT has been limited by increased low-keV image noise and workflow complexity. Photon-counting detector CT (PCD-CT) addresses these limitations by offering improved energy resolution, reduced electronic noise, and routine acquisition of multi-energy data without dedicated dual-energy protocols. In particular, low-keV VMI around 40 keV can be generated with clinically acceptable noise, enabling consistent enhancement-based assessment in daily practice. Iodine-based reconstructions further complement morphologic evaluation by visualizing viable tumor enhancement and enabling quantitative analysis. This organ-based pictorial review summarizes practical applications of PCD-CT-based spectral imaging in oncology. Across organ systems, spectral CT may provide complementary problem-solving information by improving lesion detection, tumor extent delineation, and diagnostic confidence, particularly when conventional CT findings are equivocal, or MRI is unavailable, contraindicated, or limited. Emerging quantitative parameters, including electron density, effective atomic number, and advanced material decomposition, may further expand oncologic CT applications, although outcome-driven validation remains limited. Together, these features position PCD-CT as a practical spectral imaging platform for routine oncologic CT. KEY POINTS: Question How can PCD-CT address low-keV image noise and workflow barriers that have limited routine DECT-based spectral imaging in oncologic CT practice? Findings PCD-CT enables low-keV VMI and iodine-based reconstructions that may improve lesion conspicuity, tumor-extent assessment, and problem-solving across organ-specific oncologic workflows. Critical relevance statement This review clarifies practical, evidence-aware uses of PCD-CT spectral reconstructions in oncology, highlighting low-keV VMI as an adjunct, selective iodine-map problem-solving, and investigational quantitative parameters.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42855624What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.