Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25771906›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2015

Nuclear imaging of neuroendocrine tumors with unknown primary: why, when and how?

Prasanna Santhanam, Sangeeta Chandramahanti, Alexander Kroiss, Run Yu, Philippe Ruszniewski, Rakesh Kumar, David Taïeb

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Dual PET Imaging with [Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Application of molecular probes in nuclear imaging of neuroendocrine tumors.Zhejiang da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Zhejiang University. Medical sciences · 2021
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

7 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Prasanna SanthanamSection of Endocrinology, Department of Internal Medicine, Joan C Edwards School of Medicine, Marshall University, Huntington, WV, USA.
Sangeeta Chandramahanti
Alexander Kroiss
Run Yu
Philippe Ruszniewski
Rakesh Kumar
David Taïeb
Marshall University · USAll India Institute of Medical Sciences · INCedars-Sinai Medical Center · USInnsbruck Medical University · ATInserm · FRUniversité Paris Cité · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) with unknown primary (CUP-NET) are associated with a poor prognosis (10-year survival 22%), grade 1 and 2 NETs having a more favorable outcome than grade 3 (also called carcinoma). There is evidence that an effort should be made to localize the primary tumor even in the presence of metastasis because resection of the primary tumor(s) may improve disease-free and overall survival, and because the choice of chemotherapeutic agent depends on the location of the primary tumor. Localization of the tumors remains challenging and often relies on a combination of radiological, endoscopic and functional imaging. The functional imaging protocol for evaluation of these patients has historically relied on somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS). However, the sensitivity and specificity of SRS may be unsatisfactory, especially for NETs of midgut origin. Newer PET radiotracers such as (68)Ga-labeled somatostatin analogs ((68)Ga-DOTA-SSTa) and (18)F-DOPA have shown promise. In direct comparisons between (68)Ga-DOTA-SSTa PET/CT and (99m)Tc-HYNIC-octreotide/(111)In-pentetreotide SPECT(/CT), (68)Ga-DOTA-SSTa performed better than other techniques, giving a compelling reason for switching from SPECT/CT to PET/CT imaging. (18)F-DOPA performs better than SRS and CT in well-differentiated NETs of the small intestine. For detecting pancreatic NETs, the high background uptake of (18)F-DOPA by the normal exocrine pancreas can be somewhat overcome by pretreatment with carbidopa. We have suggested a protocol in which SRS is replaced by one of the two agents (preferably with (68)Ga-DOTA-SSTa, alternatively (18)F-DOPA) as first-line nuclear tracer for detection of CUP-NET in patients with well-differentiated NETs and (18)F-FDG PET/CT may be an additional diagnostic test for poorly differentiated tumors and for prognostication. In the near future, it is expected that patients with CUP-NET will benefit from newly developed PET approaches (radiopharmaceuticals) and intraoperative PET imaging.

Indexed as

Positron-Emission TomographyHumansNeoplasms, Unknown PrimaryNeuroendocrine TumorsRadiopharmaceuticalsReceptors, SomatostatinRadiopharmaceuticalsReceptors, Somatostatin

Identifiers

PMID25771906
OpenAlexW2026817341

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.