ReviewBiomarkers in cancer2016
PET Metabolic Biomarkers for Cancer.
Review in Biomarkers in cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The metabolic addiction of cancer stem cells.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Global research dynamics in metabolic biomarkers and cancer: a bibliometric study from 2015 to 2025.Discover oncology · 2025Review
- Review
- Biomarkers for Early Cancer Detection: A Landscape View of Recent Advancements, Spotlighting Pancreatic and Liver Cancers.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2024Review
- Towards personalised dosimetry in patients with liver malignancy treated withEJNMMI physics · 2022Article
- Metabolomics and the Multi-Omics View of Cancer.Metabolites · 2022Review
- Cancer cell metabolic plasticity in migration and metastasis.Clinical & experimental metastasis · 2021Review
- Flavonoids against the Warburg phenotype-concepts of predictive, preventive and personalised medicine to cut the Gordian knot of cancer cell metabolism.The EPMA journal · 2020Review
- Review
- Guidance on the use of PET for treatment planning in radiotherapy clinical trials.The British journal of radiology · 2019Article
- Anti-signal Recognition Particle Antibody-positive Necrotizing Myopathy with Secondary Cardiomyopathy: The First Myocardial Biopsy- and Multimodal Imaging-proven Case.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2019Article
- Review
- Metabolism of Stem and Progenitor Cells: Proper Methods to Answer Specific Questions.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2019Review
- Is the measurement of the size of uterine lesions with positron emission tomography consistent in pre- and postmenopausal periods in endometrioid-type endometrial cancer?Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2018Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The body's main fuel sources are fats, carbohydrates (glucose), proteins, and ketone bodies. It is well known that an important hallmark of cancer cells is the overconsumption of glucose. Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging using the glucose analog (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) has been a powerful cancer diagnostic tool for many decades. Apart from surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy represent the two main domains for cancer therapy, targeting tumor proliferation, cell division, and DNA replication-all processes that require a large amount of energy. Currently, in vivo clinical imaging of metabolism is performed almost exclusively using PET radiotracers that assess oxygen consumption and mechanisms of energy substrate consumption. This paper reviews the utility of PET imaging biomarkers for the detection of cancer proliferation, vascularization, metabolism, treatment response, and follow-up after radiation therapy, chemotherapy, and chemotherapy-related side effects.
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.