ArticleEJNMMI research2015
Non-invasive imaging of implanted peritoneal carcinomatosis in mice using PET and bioluminescence imaging.
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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dual Magnetic Particle Imaging and Akaluc Bioluminescence Imaging for Tracking Cancer Cell Metastasis.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2023Article
- Non-Invasive Imaging and Scoring of Peritoneal Metastases in Small Preclinical Animal Models Using Ultrasound: A Preliminary Trial.Biomedicines · 2022Article
- Article
- Photo-Based Nanomedicines Using Polymeric Systems in the Field of Cancer Imaging and Therapy.Biomedicines · 2020Review
- Spectral photon-counting CT imaging of colorectal peritoneal metastases: initial experience in rats.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Article
- Imaging Cancer Metabolism.Biomolecules & therapeutics · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-invasive imaging of peritoneal carcinomatosis remains challenging. The aim of this study was to compare positron emission tomography (PET) and bioluminescence imaging (BLI) for the early detection of peritoneal carcinomatosis in a mouse model.
methodsFemale nude mice were inoculated intraperitoneally with 1×10(7) HSC45-M2-luc gastric cancer cells. The cells were stably transfected with the gene coding for firefly luciferase. Tumour development was monitored using PET and BLI and in two subgroups, on days 3 and 4 or on days 6 and 7 after tumour cell inoculation. Tumour nodules found on post mortem examination served as the reference standard for evaluating the images.
resultsPET detected 58/82 lesions (sensitivity 71 %). This method detected all (100 %) nodules larger than 6 mm, 88 % of nodules in the range of >2-4 mm, and even 58 % of small nodules measuring only 1-2 mm. BLI identified a total of 40/82 lesions (sensitivity 49 %). The difference between PET and BLI was statistically significant at p < 0.05 (PET/BLI chi-square 8.2).
conclusionsPET was more sensitive than BLI for the detection of early peritoneal carcinomatosis in our mouse model. The sensitivity of BLI largely depended on the site of the lesions in relation to the imaging device.
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.