ReviewEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2011
A new dimension of FDG-PET interpretation: assessment of tumor biology.
Review in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
37 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Associations between GLUT expression and SUV values derived from FDG-PET in different tumors-A systematic review and meta analysis.PloS one · 2019Pooled it
- Pre-Hydration and a Forced Diuresis Protocol forJournal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Glycolysis in gastrointestinal stromal tumor: a brief overview.Neoplasia (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Review
- Role ofCancers · 2024Review
- Distinct FDG PET/CT avidity among newly diagnosed intravascular large B-cell lymphoma patients: a descriptive observational study.Annals of hematology · 2024Observational
- An evaluation of the physiological uptake range ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
- Combined Metabolic and Functional Tumor Volumes on [Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Development and External Validation ofCancers · 2023Article
- Direct co-registration of [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023Article
- 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography Is Useful in the Evaluation of Prognosis in Retroperitoneal Sarcoma.Cancers · 2021Article
- Article
- Emerging role of 18F-FDG PET/CT in Castleman disease: a review.Insights into imaging · 2021Review
- Long-Term Survival and Value ofLife (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Characteristics of PhysiologicalFrontiers in veterinary science · 2021Article
- Simultaneous PET/MRI in the Evaluation of Breast and Prostate Cancer Using Combined Na[Molecular imaging and biology · 2020Article
- FDG-PET/CT for Response Monitoring in Metastatic Breast Cancer: Today, Tomorrow, and Beyond.Cancers · 2019Article
- Global disease score (GDS) is the name of the game!European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2019Article
- Current best practice in the management of neuroendocrine tumors.Therapeutic advances in endocrinology and metabolism · 2019Review
- Cancer metastasizes to the bone marrow and not to the bone: time for a paradigm shift!European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2018Article
- Use of 18F-FDG-PET/CT for Retroperitoneal/Intra-Abdominal Soft Tissue Sarcomas.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(18)F-Fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) is increasingly being used for the evaluation of several malignancies. Key to the correct interpretation of oncological FDG-PET studies is awareness of the concept that the degree of FDG uptake reflects the biology of the tumor in many cancers. More specifically, cancers with high FDG uptake are often histologically and clinically more aggressive than those with low or no FDG uptake. Therefore, although a negative FDG-PET scan in a patient with a cancer that has a size above the spatial resolution of PET may be interpreted as false-negative in terms of tumor detectability, it should in fact be regarded as true-negative from the view-point of tumor biology. This nonsystematic review will give examples of several major cancers in which the relationship between FDG avidity and tumor biology is applicable, and emphasizes the need to reconsider the definition of a "false-negative" FDG-PET scan in clinical oncology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21225422What 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.