ArticleEJNMMI research2015
Evaluation of the specificity of [(18)F]fludarabine PET/CT in a xenograft model of follicular lymphoma: comparison with [(18)F]FDG and impact of rituximab therapy.
Article in EJNMMI research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- FDG-PET/CT in the Monitoring of Lymphoma Immunotherapy Response: Current Status and Future Prospects.Cancers · 2023Review
- FDG-PET/CT in Lymphoma: Where Do We Go Now?Cancers · 2021Article
- [Frontiers in medicine · 2019Review
- [Theranostics · 2018Article
- [18F]Fludarabine-PET in a murine model of multiple myeloma.PloS one · 2017Article
- A novel non-Hodgkin lymphoma murine model closer to the standard clinical scenario.Journal of translational medicine · 2016Article
- Quantifying and correcting for tail vein extravasation in small animal PET scans in cancer research: is there an impact on therapy assessment?EJNMMI research · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background[(18)F]Fludarabine is a novel positron emission tomography (PET) radiotracer for imaging lymphoma. The purpose of this preclinical study was to evaluate the robustness of [(18)F]fludarabine during rituximab therapy. In addition, a comparison was made between [(18)F]fludarabine and [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose ([(18)F]FDG) with regard to their concordance with histologically derived data.
methodsCB17-SCID mice bearing human follicular DOHH-2 lymphoma were treated once weekly with rituximab (10 mg/kg) or physiological saline over 3 weeks. To obtain the tracer uptake in the metabolically active volume of the tumour (MAVT), a background-level threshold was applied to the volume of interest (VOI) defined on computed tomography (CT) image. The tumour uptake analysis was performed with MAVT-based segmentation for data analysis of sequential [(18)F]fludarabine PET/CT studies and with total tumour-based segmentation for comparison with histologically derived data.
resultsThe correlation between the MAVT and [(18)F]fludarabine accumulation (%ID) in those viable tissues was equally significant for both vehicle- or rituximab-treated mice; for these latter, the presence of lymphoid tissues at the end of imaging sessions was confirmed histologically. A stronger correlation was demonstrated between quantitative values extracted from [(18)F]fludarabine-PET and histology (r (2) = 0.91, p < 0.001) when compared to [(18)F]FDG-PET (r (2) = 0.55, p = 0.03).
conclusions[(18)F]Fludarabine uptake in the follicular lymphoma model compared favourably with [(18)F]FDG in terms of specificity for PET imaging and also remained robust for persistent viable tissues following rituximab therapy. [(18)F]Fludarabine PET/CT may be a promising approach to evaluate lymphoma, including their surveillance during therapy.
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.