ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2016
(18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography comparison of gastric lymphoma and gastric carcinoma.
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A pretreatmentTranslational cancer research · 2026Article
- Imaging of Gastrointestinal Tract Ailments.Journal of imaging · 2023Review
- F-18 FDG PET/CT Imaging in Normal Variants, Pitfalls and Artifacts in the Abdomen and Pelvis.Frontiers in nuclear medicine · 2021Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ((18)F-FDG PET/CT) features in gastric lymphoma and gastric carcinoma.
methodsPatients with newly diagnosed gastric lymphoma or gastric carcinoma who underwent (18)F-FDG PET/CT prior to treatment were included in this study. We reviewed and analyzed the PET/CT features of gastric wall lesions, including FDG avidity, pattern (focal/diffuse), and intensity [maximal standard uptake value: (SUVmax)]. The correlation of SUVmax with gastric clinicopathological variables was investigated by χ(2) test, and receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to determine the differential diagnostic value of SUVmax-associated parameters in gastric lymphoma and gastric carcinoma.
resultsFifty-two patients with gastric lymphoma and 73 with gastric carcinoma were included in this study. Abnormal gastric FDG accumulation was found in 49 patients (94.23%) with gastric lymphoma and 65 patients (89.04%) with gastric carcinoma. Gastric lymphoma patients predominantly presented with type I and type II lesions, whereas gastric carcinoma patients mainly had type III lesions. The SUVmax (13.39 ± 9.24 vs 8.35 ± 5.80, P < 0.001) and SUVmax/THKmax (maximal thickness) (7.96 ± 4.02 vs 4.88 ± 3.32, P < 0.001) were both higher in patients with gastric lymphoma compared with gastric carcinoma. ROC curve analysis suggested a better performance of SUVmax/THKmax in the evaluation of gastric lesions between gastric lymphoma and gastric carcinoma in comparison with that of SUVmax alone.
conclusionPET/CT features differ between gastric lymphoma and carcinoma, which can improve PET/CT evaluation of gastric wall lesions and help differentiate gastric lymphoma from gastric carcinoma.
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.