Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28878849›Full record

ArticleNuclear medicine and molecular imaging2017

Prognostic Value of Tumor-to-Blood Standardized Uptake Ratio in Patients with Resectable Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Seunghyeon Shin, Kyoungjune Pak, In Joo Kim, Bum Soo Kim, Seong Jang Kim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Predictive value of metabolic parameters derived from preoperativeQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Frontiers in oncology · 2022
    Article
  7. Risk Stratification UsingDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Improving the Prognostic Performance of SUVJournal of clinical medicine · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Test-Retest Variability in Lesion SUV and Lesion SUR inJournal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2017
    Article
  12. 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

5 authors.

Seunghyeon ShinDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Korea.
Kyoungjune PakDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Korea.
In Joo KimDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Korea.
Bum Soo KimDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Research Institute for Convergence of Biomedical Science and Technology, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Yangsan, Korea.
Seong Jang KimDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Research Institute for Convergence of Biomedical Science and Technology, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Yangsan, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesPreviously published studies showed that the standard tumor-to-blood standardized uptake value (SUV) ratio (SUR) was a more accurate prognostic method than tumor maximum standardized uptake value (SUV

methodsSeventy-seven patients who underwent curative resection for NSCLC between January 2010 to December 2013 were enrolled in this study.

resultsIn Cox regression analysis, N stage predicted for both recurrence (

conclusionsAmong PET parameters, SUR

Indexed as

Fluorodeoxyglucose F18Non-small-cell lung cancerPositron-emission tomographyPrognosisRecurrenceSurvival

Identifiers

PMID28878849
PMCPMC5567617

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.