Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24519556›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2014

Current role of FDG PET/CT in lymphoma.

Lale Kostakoglu, Bruce D Cheson

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
9.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2019
    Article
  12. Prognostic Value of Functional Parameters ofContrast media & molecular imaging · 2019
    Article
  13. Ultra-early response assessment in lymphoma treatment: [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2018
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Observational
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lale KostakogluDepartment of Radiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, One Gustave Levy Place, Box 1141, New York, NY, 10029, USA, lale.kostakoglu@mssm.edu.
Bruce D Cheson
Georgetown University · USIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The management approach in Hodgkin's (HL) and high-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphomas (NHL) has shifted towards reducing the toxicity and long-term adverse effects associated with treatment while maintaining favorable outcomes in low-risk patients. The success of an individualized treatment strategy depends largely on accurate diagnostic tests both at staging and during therapy. In this regard, positron emission tomography (PET) using fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) with computed tomography (CT) has proved effective as a metabolic imaging tool with compelling evidence supporting its superiority over conventional modalities, particularly in staging and early evaluation of response. Eventually, this modality was integrated into the routine staging and restaging algorithm of lymphomas. This review will summarize the data on the proven and potential utility of PET/CT imaging for staging, response assessment, and restaging, describing current limitations of this imaging modality.

Indexed as

Fluorodeoxyglucose F18Multimodal ImagingPositron-Emission TomographyRadiopharmaceuticalsTomography, X-Ray ComputedHumansLymphomaFluorodeoxyglucose F18Radiopharmaceuticals

Identifiers

PMID24519556
OpenAlexW2080726207

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.