Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28972796›Full record

SynthesisThe British journal of radiology2017

PET imaging in anal canal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Aamer Mahmud, Raymond Poon, Derek Jonker

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The British journal of radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 90 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Treatment of Anal Cancer.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2019
    Pooled it
  5. Anal Carcinoma, Version 2.2018, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · 2018
    Guideline
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Optimising chemoradiotherapy in anal cancer.ESMO gastrointestinal oncology · 2026
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Interstitial HDR brachytherapy for anal cancer-results and quality of life.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. [Diagnostics, treatment and aftercare of anal cancer].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Follow-up imaging of anal cancer after treatment.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2023
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Impact of dose escalation on colostomy-free survival and treatment outcome in squamous cell anal carcinoma.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2023
    Article
  20. Review
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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Aamer Mahmud1 Department of Oncology, School of Medicine, Queen's University, Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario, Kingston General Hospital , Kingston, ONT , Canada.
Raymond Poon2 Program in Evidence-Based Care, Cancer Care Ontario, Juravinski Hospital and Cancer Centre , Hamilton, ONT , Canada.
Derek Jonker3 Division of Medical Oncology, University of Ottawa, The Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre, General Campus , Ottawa, ONT , Canada.
Juravinski Hospital · CAKingston General Hospital · CAUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of this study was to systematically review the literature to synthesize and summarize the evidence surrounding the clinical utility of positron emission tomography (PET) imaging in patients with anal canal cancer.

methodsThe literature was searched using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases. Studies comparing PET or PET/CT with conventional imaging in the staging, response evaluation and follow-up of anal canal cancer were deemed eligible for inclusion.

results17 studies met the inclusion criteria. For the detection of primary tumour in situ, the pooled sensitivity was 99% for PET or PET/CT and 67% for CT. For the detection of inguinal lymph nodes, PET/CT had an overall sensitivity of 93% and specificity of 76%. PET or PET/CT upstaged 5.1 to 37.5% of patients and downstaged 8.2 to 26.7% of patients. Treatment plans were modified in 12.5 to 59.3% of patients, which consisted mainly of radiotherapy dose or field changes. Complete response on PET or PET/CT is a good prognostic factor for overall and progression-free survival.

conclusionsPET/CT seems to add value to conventional imaging in the initial staging of patients with T2-4 disease but further high-quality research is required to validate this. There is insufficient evidence at this time to recommend a routine use of PET/CT in the assessment of treatment response or follow-up. Advances in knowledge: PET/CT appears to alter the disease stage and management in a meaningful number of patients to justify its use as part of staging investigations in locally advanced cases.

Indexed as

Anal CanalAnus NeoplasmsHumansPositron-Emission Tomography

Identifiers

PMID28972796
PMCPMC6047643
OpenAlexW2762345927

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.