Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26753880›Full record

Trial reportBMC cancer2016

(18)F-fluoride positron emission tomography/computed tomography and bone scintigraphy for diagnosis of bone metastases in newly diagnosed, high-risk prostate cancer patients: study protocol for a multicentre, diagnostic test accuracy study.

Randi F Fonager, Helle D Zacho, Niels C Langkilde, Lars J Petersen

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2018
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Diagnostic test accuracy study ofAmerican journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2017
    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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Randi F FonagerDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Clinical Cancer Research Center, Aalborg University Hospital, Hobrovej 18-22, DK-9000, Aalborg, Denmark.
Helle D ZachoDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Clinical Cancer Research Center, Aalborg University Hospital, Hobrovej 18-22, DK-9000, Aalborg, Denmark.
Niels C LangkildeDepartment of Urology, Aalborg University Hospital, Reberbansgade 15, DK-9000, Aalborg, Denmark.
Lars J PetersenDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Clinical Cancer Research Center, Aalborg University Hospital, Hobrovej 18-22, DK-9000, Aalborg, Denmark. lajp@rn.dk.
Aalborg University Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFor decades, planar bone scintigraphy has been the standard practice for detection of bone metastases in prostate cancer and has been endorsed by recent oncology/urology guidelines. It is a sensitive method with modest specificity. (18)F-fluoride positron emission tomography/computed tomography has shown improved sensitivity and specificity over bone scintigraphy, but because of methodological issues such as retrospective design and verification bias, the existing level of evidence with (18)F-fluoride positron emission tomography/computed tomography is limited. The primary objective is to compare the diagnostic properties of (18)F-fluoride positron emission tomography/computed tomography versus bone scintigraphy on an individual patient basis. METHODS/

designOne hundred forty consecutive, high-risk prostate cancer patients will be recruited from several hospitals in Denmark. Sample size was calculated using Hayen's method for diagnostic comparative studies. This study will be conducted in accordance with recommendations of standards for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies. Eligibility criteria comprise the following: 1) biopsy-proven prostate cancer, 2) PSA ≥ 50 ng/ml (equals a prevalence of bone metastasis of ≈ 50% in the study population on bone scintigraphy), 3) patients must be eligible for androgen deprivation therapy, 4) no current or prior cancer (within the past 5 years), 5) ability to comply with imaging procedures, and 6) patients must not receive any investigational drugs. Planar bone scintigraphy and (18)F-fluoride positron emission tomography/computed tomography will be performed within a window of 14 days at baseline. All scans will be repeated after 26 weeks of androgen deprivation therapy, and response of individual lesions will be used for diagnostic classification of the lesions on baseline imaging among responding patients. A response is defined as PSA normalisation or ≥ 80% reduction compared with baseline levels, testosterone below castration levels, no skeletal related events, and no clinical signs of progression. Images are read by blinded nuclear medicine physicians. The protocol is currently recruiting. DISCUSSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the largest prospective studies comparing (18)F-fluoride positron emission tomography/computed tomography and bone scintigraphy. It is conducted in full accordance with recommendations for diagnostic accuracy trials. It is intended to provide valid documentation for the use of (18)F-fluoride positron emission tomography/computed tomography for examination of bone metastasis in the staging of prostate cancer.

Indexed as

Positron-Emission TomographyTomography, X-Ray ComputedBone NeoplasmsDenmarkFluorine RadioisotopesHumansMaleMultimodal ImagingNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasm StagingProstatic NeoplasmsRisk FactorsFluorine Radioisotopes

Identifiers

PMID26753880
PMCPMC4709935
OpenAlexW2238612699

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.