Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25794075›Full record

ArticleAJR. American journal of roentgenology2015

PET/MRI for the evaluation of patients with lymphoma: initial observations.

Laura Heacock, Joseph Weissbrot, Roy Raad, Naomi Campbell, Kent P Friedman, Fabio Ponzo, Hersh Chandarana

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing 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.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. CNN-based detection of pediatric lymphoma on whole body [American journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Article
  4. Impact of pretreatment PET/MRI on radiooncologic target delineation in Hodgkin's lymphoma: a case series.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Diagnostic performance of prospective same-day 18F-FDG PET/MRI and 18F-FDG PET/CT in the staging and response assessment of lymphoma.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2023
    Article
  13. Optimized Whole-Body PET MRI Sequence Workflow in Pediatric Hodgkin Lymphoma Patients.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2021
    Article
  20. PET/MRI Improves Management of Children with Cancer.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2021
    Review
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.

Laura Heacock1 Department of Radiology, New York University Langone Medical Center, 660 First Ave, New York, NY 10016.
Joseph Weissbrot
Roy Raad
Naomi Campbell
Kent P Friedman
Fabio Ponzo
Hersh Chandarana

Funding

TR&D 4: Revealing Microstructure: Biophysical modeling and validation for discovery and clinical careP41EB017183 · NIBIB · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI Hersh Chandarana · 2014 to 2026
$19.3M
NIBIB NIH HHS P41 EB017183
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective of our study was to assess the role of recently introduced hybrid PET/MRI in the evaluation of lymphoma patients using PET/CT as a reference standard. SUBJECTS AND

methodsIn this prospective study 28 consecutive lymphoma patients (18 men, 10 women; mean age, 53.6 years) undergoing clinically indicated PET/ CT were subsequently imaged with PET/MRI using residual FDG activity from the PET/ CT study. Blinded readers evaluated PET/CT (reference standard), PET/MRI, and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) studies separately; for each study, they assessed nodal and extranodal involvement. Each FDG-avid nodal station was marked and compared on DWI, PET/MRI, and PET/CT. Modified Ann Arbor staging was performed and compared between PET/MRI and PET/CT. The maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) on PET/MRI for FDG-avid nodal lesions was compared with the SUVmax on PET/CT. The apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) for FDG-avid nodal lesions was compared to SUVmax on PET/MRI.

resultsFifty-one FDG-avid nodal groups were identified on PET/CT in 13 patients. PET/MRI identified 51 of these nodal groups with a sensitivity of 100%. DWI identified 32 nodal groups for a sensitivity of 62.7%. PET/MRI staging and PET/CT staging were concordant in 96.4% of patients. For the one patient with discordant staging results, disease was correctly upstaged to stage IV on the basis of the PET/MRI finding of bone marrow involvement, which was missed on PET/CT. DWI staging was concordant with PET/CT staging in 64.3% of the patients. The increased staging accuracy of PET/MRI relative to DWI was significant (p=0.004). SUVmax measured on PET/MRI and PET/CT showed excellent statistically significant correlation (r=0.98, p<0.001). There was a poor negative correlation between ADC and SUVmax (r=-0.036, p=0.847).

conclusionPET/MRI can be used to assess disease burden in lymphoma with sensitivity similar to PET/CT and can be a viable alternative for lymphoma staging and follow-up.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingMultimodal ImagingAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFluorodeoxyglucose F18HumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedLymphomaMaleMiddle AgedPositron-Emission TomographyProspective StudiesRadiopharmaceuticalsTomography, X-Ray ComputedFluorodeoxyglucose F18Radiopharmaceuticalsdiffusion-weighted imaging (DWI)hybridlymphomaPET/MRI

Identifiers

PMID25794075
PMCPMC4465553

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.