ArticlePloS one2016
Total Body Metabolic Tumor Response in ALK Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Treated with ALK Inhibition.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Management of Oligoprogression in Patients with Metastatic NSCLC Harboring ALK Rearrangements.Cancers · 2022Review
- The quantum leap in therapeutics for advancedFrontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Case Report: Two Rare Cases of Complete Metabolic Response to Crizotinib in Patients With Rearranged ROS1 and ALK Metastatic Non-small Lung Cancer.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- SEOM-SERAM-SEMNIM guidelines on the use of functional and molecular imaging techniques in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2018Article
- Evaluating tumor response with FDG PET: updates on PERCIST, comparison with EORTC criteria and clues to future developments.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn ALK-positive advanced NSCLC, crizotinib has a high response rate and effectively increases quality of life and survival. CT measurement of the tumor may insufficiently reflect the actual tumor load changes during targeted therapy with crizotinib. We explored whether 18F-FDG PET measured metabolic changes are different from CT based changes and studied the impact of these changes on disease progression.
methods18F-FDG PET/CT was performed prior to and after 6 weeks of crizotinib treatment. Tumor response on CT was classified with RECIST 1.1, while 18F-FDG PET response was assessed according to the 1999 EORTC recommendations and PERCIST criteria. Agreement was assessed using McNemars test. During follow-up, patients received additional PET/CT during crizotinib treatment and second generation ALK inhibition. We assessed whether PET was able to detect progression earlier then CT.
resultsIn this exploratory study 15 patients were analyzed who were treated with crizotinib. There was a good agreement in the applicability of CT and 18F-FDG PET/CT using the EORTC recommendations. During first line crizotinib and subsequent second line ALK inhibitors, PET was able to detect progression earlier then CT in 10/22 (45%) events of progression and in the others disease progression was detected simultaneously.
conclusionIn advanced ALK positive NSCLC PET was able to detect progressive disease earlier than with CT in nearly half of the assessments while both imaging tests performed similar in the others.
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.