Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25143865›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2014

Clinical impact of FDG-PET/CT on colorectal cancer staging and treatment strategy.

Rasmus K Petersen, Søren Hess, Abass Alavi, Poul F Høilund-Carlsen

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American 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. It is linked to trial NCT04750772 (Comparison of Positron Nuclide Labeled DOTA-FAPI PET and FDG PET Study in Colocrectal Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04750772 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Comparison of Positron Nuclide Labeled DOTA-FAPI PET and FDG PET Study in Colocrectal Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorPeking University Cancer Hospital & InstituteRan2019 to 2023Enrolled60ConditionsTumor, Solid, Positron-Emission Tomography, Colorectal CancerArms18F-FDG and 68Ga-DOTA-FAPI04 PET/CT, 18F-FDG and 18F-DOTA-FAPI04 PET/CT
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. FDG PET Hybrid Imaging.Recent results in cancer research. Fortschritte der Krebsforschung. Progres dans les recherches sur le cancer · 2026
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Observational
  9. Predictive value ofReports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. The Prognostic Value ofMolecular imaging and radionuclide therapy · 2020
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Predictive Value of [Scientific reports · 2019
    Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

4 authors.

Rasmus K PetersenDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University Hospital Denmark.
Søren HessDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University Hospital Denmark.
Abass AlaviDivision of Nuclear Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Hospital of The University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Poul F Høilund-CarlsenDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University Hospital Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

FDG-PET/CT is rarely used for initial staging of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). Surgical resection of primary tumor and isolated metastases may result in long-term survival or presumed cure, whereas disseminated disease contraindicates operation. We analyzed a retrospective material to elucidate the potential value of FDG-PET/CT for staging of CRC. Data were retrieved from 67 consecutive patients (24-84 years) with histopathologically proven CRC who had undergone FDG-PET/CT in addition to conventional imaging for initial staging. Treatment plans before and after FDG-PET/CT were compared and patients divided as follows: (A) Patients with a change in therapy following FDG-PET/CT and (B) Patients without a change following FDG-PET/CT. Sixty-two patients had colon and five had rectal cancer. Of these, 20 (30%; CI 20.2-41.7) belonged to group A, whereas 47 (70%; CI 58.3-79.8) fell in group B. In conclusion, FDG-PET/CT changed treatment plan in 30% of cases. In ⅓ of these there was either a change from intended curative to palliative therapy or vice versa, while in the remaining ⅔ the pattern was more mixed. Thus, even in a retrospective routine material there were substantial changes in management strategy following FDG-PET/CT for staging in CRC.

Indexed as

clinical impactcolorectal cancerFDG-PET/CTtreatment strategy

Identifiers

PMID25143865
PMCPMC4138141

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.