Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27139696›Full record

ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2017

Utility of 18F-FDG-PET/CT in patients suspected of paraneoplastic neurological syndrome: importance of risk classification.

F J Pena Pardo, A M García Vicente, M Amo-Salas, J F López-Fidalgo, J A Garrido Robles, J Á de Ayala Fernández, P Del Saz Saucedo, M Muñoz Pasadas, A Soriano Castrejón

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

F J Pena PardoNuclear Medicine Department, University General Hospital, C/Obispo Rafael Torija s/n, 13005, Ciudad Real, Spain. fjpena@msn.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1993-6813
A M García VicenteNuclear Medicine Department, University General Hospital, C/Obispo Rafael Torija s/n, 13005, Ciudad Real, Spain.
M Amo-SalasMathematics Department, Castilla La Mancha University, Ciudad Real, Spain.
J F López-FidalgoMathematics Department, Castilla La Mancha University, Ciudad Real, Spain.
J A Garrido RoblesNeurology Department, Virgen de la Salud Hospital, Toledo, Spain.
J Á de Ayala FernándezInternal Medicine Department, University Hospital, Albacete, Spain.
P Del Saz SaucedoNeurology Department, Mancha Centro Hospital, Alcázar de San Juan, Ciudad Real, Spain.
M Muñoz PasadasNeurology Department, Puertollano Hospital, Ciudad Real, Spain.
A Soriano CastrejónNuclear Medicine Department, University General Hospital, C/Obispo Rafael Torija s/n, 13005, Ciudad Real, Spain.
Hospital General Universitario de Ciudad Real · ESUniversity of Castilla-La Mancha · ESHospital General Universitario de Albacete · ESHospital Virgen de la Salud · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess the diagnostic impact of 18F-FDG-PET/CT in patients suspected of paraneoplastic neurological syndrome (PNS) based on our own pre-test risk classification (PRC).

methodsA multicenter retrospective longitudinal study was conducted from 2006 to 2014. We designed a seven-point scoring system using the clinical syndrome characteristics [classical (CS) and non-classical syndromes (NCS)] and its location (central, peripheral, in the neuromuscular junction or combined), onconeural antibodies and tumor markers. Patients were classified as low (score 0-2), intermediate (3-4) and high (5-7) pre-test risk of PNS. FDG-PET/CT was classified as negative or positive. Final diagnosis according Graus' criteria (definite, possible or no PNS) was established. Relations between clinical and metabolic variables with the final diagnosis were studied.

results73 patients were included, with a follow-up time of 33 months. Eleven (15 %) patients were finally diagnosed with neoplasm (8 invasive cancers). Ultimately, 13 (18 %) and 24 (33 %) subjects were diagnosed as definite or possible PNS. All the patients with final diagnosis of neoplasm had a CS (p = 0.005). PET/CT was helpful to diagnose 6/8 (75 %) invasive cancers. PET/CT findings were associated with the final diagnosis of neoplasm (p = 0.003) and the diagnosis of PNS attending to Graus' criteria (p = 0.019). PRC showed significant association with the final diagnosis of neoplasm and PET/CT results. A majority of patients (10/11) diagnosed of neoplasm had intermediate/high-risk.

conclusionsOur PRC seems to be a valid tool to select candidates for PET/CT imaging in this setting. PET/CT detected malignancy in a significant proportion of patients with invasive cancer.

Indexed as

Fluorodeoxyglucose F18RadiopharmaceuticalsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedMultimodal ImagingNeoplasm StagingNervous System DiseasesParaneoplastic SyndromesPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyPrognosisRetrospective StudiesFluorodeoxyglucose F18Radiopharmaceuticals18F-FDGParaneoplastic neurological syndromePET/CTRisk classification

Identifiers

PMID27139696
OpenAlexW2345579471

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.