ArticleInternational journal of clinical oncology2014
Diagnostic accuracy of FDG-PET cancer screening in asymptomatic individuals: use of record linkage from the Osaka Cancer Registry.
Article in International journal of clinical oncology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Applicability and performance ofJapanese journal of radiology · 2025Pooled it
- A Phase I/II Study for Analytic Validation of 89Zr-J591 ImmunoPET as a Molecular Imaging Agent for Metastatic Prostate Cancer.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2015Trial
- Biological effects ofEuropean radiology · 2026Observational
- Detection rate of FDG-PET/CT for occult cancer in patients with cryptogenic ischemic stroke.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Observational
- Thirty Years Cancer Incidence Data for Lahore, Pakistan: Trends and Patterns 1984-2014Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2018Article
- Application of whole-body FDG-PET for cancer screening in a cohort of hospital employees.Medicine · 2016Article
- Comparison of FDG-PET/CT for Cancer Detection in Populations With Different Risks of Underlying Malignancy.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhole-body cancer screening with multimodalities including [(18)F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) detects a wide range of tumors. This program has been recognized as an option for opportunistic screening, particularly in Japan. However, reports on diagnostic accuracy have been limited. We aimed to evaluate the detectability and related properties of this screening program among asymptomatic individuals in a community setting.
methodsThe study participants were 1,762 residents of Osaka Prefecture, Japan, who underwent opportunistic cancer screening at Higashitemma Clinic for the first time between November 2004 and December 2005. FDG-PET cancer screening was performed with several imaging modalities (e.g., FDG-PET, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography) and fecal occult blood test. Screening records were linked to the Osaka cancer registry within 1 year after the screening to determine sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive values.
resultsAfter excluding 12 participants with cancer detected before the screening, 33 were identified by the cancer registry to have primary cancers. Of these, the present screening program found that 28 were positive (6 prostate, 5 lung, 5 colorectal, 5 thyroid, 3 liver and 4 others). Sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive values were 84.8 % (28/33, 95 % confidence interval 69.1-93.3), 86.8 % (1,491/1,718, 85.1-88.3) and 10.1 % (28/277, 6.4-12.9), respectively.
conclusionsFDG-PET cancer screening with multimodalities reasonably and accurately detects existing asymptomatic cancer. However, the numbers of false negatives and false positives were not insignificant. Facilities that provide the screening should inform participants of relevant information, including the limitations of this program.
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.