ArticleThe oncologist2012
A prospective comparison of 18F-FDG PET/CT and CT as diagnostic tools to identify the primary tumor site in patients with extracervical carcinoma of unknown primary site.
Article in The oncologist, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.
- SEOM-GECOD clinical guideline for cancer of unknown primary (update 2025).Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Guideline
- SEOM-GECOD clinical guideline for unknown primary cancer (2021).Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2022Guideline
- Pooled it
- Rethinking cancer of unknown primary: from diagnostic challenge to targeted treatment.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2025Review
- Cauda Equina Syndrome Caused by Metastatic Sarcomatoid Carcinoma of Unknown Primary.Journal of Brown hospital medicine · 2025Article
- 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT in Cancer of Unknown Primary Tumor-A Retrospective Register-Based Cohort Study.Journal of imaging · 2023Article
- [Cancer of unknown primary (CUP)-single-site, oligometastatic, and in the head and neck region].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Review
- Out of Sight, Not Out of Mind.Journal of hospital medicine · 2021Article
- A Systematic Review of Cancer of Unknown Primary in the Head and Neck Region.Cancer management and research · 2021Review
- Sentinel node theory helps tracking of primary lesions of cancers of unknown primary.BMC cancer · 2020Article
- How I treat cancers of unknown primary.ESMO open · 2019Review
- FDG PET/CT and Conventional Imaging Methods in Cancer of Unknown Primary: an Approach to Overscanning.Nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2018Article
- 2018 consensus statement by the Spanish Society of Pathology and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology on the diagnosis and treatment of cancer of unknown primary.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2018Review
- The pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management of metastatic tumors to the ovary: a comprehensive review.Clinical & experimental metastasis · 2017Review
- The added value ofEuropean radiology · 2017Article
- Impact on Patient Management of [18F]-Fluorodeoxyglucose-Positron Emission Tomography (PET) Used for Cancer Diagnosis: Analysis of Data From the National Oncologic PET Registry.The oncologist · 2016Article
- Submucosal small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the larynx detected usingOncology letters · 2014Article
- Positron emission tomography-magnetic resonance imaging: technical review.Seminars in roentgenology · 2014Review
- 18 FDG PET-CT and Unknown Primary Tumours.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2014Article
- [Importance of nuclear medicine diagnostics in CUP syndrome].Der Radiologe · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of the present study was to evaluate prospectively the diagnostic value of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ((18)F-FDG PET/CT) and conventional CT regarding the ability to detect the primary tumor site in patients with extracervical metastases from carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP) site. PATIENTS AND
methodsFrom January 2006 to December 2010, 136 newly diagnosed CUP patients with extracervical metastases underwent (18)F-FDG PET/CT. A standard of reference (SR) was established by a multidisciplinary team to ensure that the same set of criteria were used for classification of patients, that is, either as CUP patients or patients with a suggested primary tumor site. The independently obtained suggestions of primary tumor sites using PET/CT and CT were correlated with the SR to reach a consensus regarding true-positive (TP), true-negative, false-negative, and false-positive results.
resultsSR identified a primary tumor site in 66 CUP patients (48.9%). PET/CT identified 38 TP primary tumor sites and CT identified 43 TP primary tumor sites. No statistically significant differences were observed between (18)F-FDG PET/CT and CT alone in regard to sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy.
conclusionIn the general CUP population with multiple extracervical metastases (18)F-FDG PET/CT does not represent a clear diagnostic advantage over CT alone regarding the ability to detect the primary tumor site.
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.