ReviewCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society2007
PET/CT in oncology: for which tumours is it the reference standard?
Review in Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cancer During Pregnancy: Navigating Clinical and Research Challenges.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Review
- Cervical cancer evaluated with integratedOncology letters · 2019Article
- Correlation Between Apparent Diffusion Coefficients and Standardized Uptake Values in Hybrid (18)F-FDG PET/MR: Preliminary Results in Rectal Cancer.Nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2016Article
- A Comparison Study of Esophageal Findings on (18)F-FDG PET/CT and Esophagogastroduodenoscopy.Nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2016Article
- The Melanoma MAICare Framework: A Microsimulation Model for the Assessment of Individualized Cancer Care.Cancer informatics · 2016Article
- Evaluation of Dixon Sequence on Hybrid PET/MR Compared with Contrast-Enhanced PET/CT for PET-Positive Lesions.Nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2014Article
- PET/MR: a paradigm shift.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2013Review
- Blind spots at oncological CT: lessons learned from PET/CT.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2012Review
- The role of nuclear medicine in modern therapy of cancer.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2012Review
- Whole-body hybrid PET/MRI: ready for clinical use?European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2011Article
- Positron emission tomography for benign and malignant disease.The Surgical clinics of North America · 2011Review
- Combined PET/MRI: a new dimension in whole-body oncology imaging?European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2009Review
- Risks and safety aspects related to PET/MR examinations.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2009Review
- Integrated whole body MR/PET: where are we?Korean journal of radiologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) has a growing role in the imaging of many cancers. As our experience has grown over the past number of years so has our understanding for which cancers it is particularly useful. The value of PET/CT at each stage of the cancer journey is different for each cancer. This review attempts to tease out the role of PET/CT in the common cancers with particular emphasis on where it is the imaging investigation of choice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.