Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29117314›Full record

ArticleJAMA surgery2018

Assessment of Fluorodeoxyglucose F18-Labeled Positron Emission Tomography for Diagnosis of High-Risk Lung Nodules.

Amelia W Maiga, Stephen A Deppen, Sarah Fletcher Mercaldo, Jeffrey D Blume, Chandler Montgomery, Laszlo T Vaszar, Christina Williamson, James M Isbell, Otis B Rickman, Rhonda Pinkerman and 3 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy betweenJournal of thoracic disease · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Current and Future Perspectives on Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer: A Roadmap From 2023 to 2027 From the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2024
    Review
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Higher accuracy of [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022
    Article
  14. Quantitative assessment of intratumoral 2-[Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2022
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Frontiers in oncology · 2022
    Article
  18. Integrated Biomarkers for the Management of Indeterminate Pulmonary Nodules.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Characterization ofQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2021
    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

13 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Amelia W MaigaTennessee Valley Healthcare System, Nashville, Tennessee.
Stephen A DeppenTennessee Valley Healthcare System, Nashville, Tennessee.
Sarah Fletcher MercaldoVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Jeffrey D BlumeVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Chandler MontgomeryVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Laszlo T VaszarMayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona.
Christina WilliamsonLahey Hospital and Medical Center, Burlington, Massachusetts.
James M IsbellMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Otis B RickmanVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Rhonda PinkermanTennessee Valley Healthcare System, Nashville, Tennessee.
Eric S LambrightTennessee Valley Healthcare System, Nashville, Tennessee.
Jonathan C NesbittTennessee Valley Healthcare System, Nashville, Tennessee.
Eric L GroganTennessee Valley Healthcare System, Nashville, Tennessee.
Vanderbilt University Medical Center · USVA Tennessee Valley Healthcare System · USLahey Medical Center · USMayo Clinic Hospital · USMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Decreasing Unnecessary Invasive Lung Cancer Diagnostic ProceduresIK2HX000758 · VA · VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION · PI GROGAN, ERIC L · 2014 to 2015
–
HSRD VA IK2 HX000758NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Clinicians rely heavily on fluorodeoxyglucose F18-labeled positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) imaging to evaluate lung nodules suspicious for cancer. We evaluated the performance of FDG-PET for the diagnosis of malignancy in differing populations with varying cancer prevalence. Objective: To determine the performance of FDG-PET/computed tomography (CT) in diagnosing lung malignancy across different populations with varying cancer prevalence. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter retrospective cohort study at 6 academic medical centers and 1 Veterans Affairs facility that comprised a total of 1188 patients with known or suspected lung cancer from 7 different cohorts from 2005 to 2015. Exposures: 18F fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT imaging. Main Outcome and Measures: Final diagnosis of cancer or benign disease was determined by pathological tissue diagnosis or at least 18 months of stable radiographic follow-up. Results: Most patients were male smokers older than 60 years. Overall cancer prevalence was 81% (range by cohort, 50%-95%). The median nodule size was 22 mm (interquartile range, 15-33 mm). Positron emission tomography/CT sensitivity and specificity were 90.1% (95% CI, 88.1%-91.9%) and 39.8% (95% CI, 33.4%-46.5%), respectively. False-positive PET scans occurred in 136 of 1188 patients. Positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 86.4% (95% CI, 84.2%-88.5%) and 48.7% (95% CI, 41.3%-56.1%), respectively. On logistic regression, larger nodule size and higher population cancer prevalence were both significantly associated with PET accuracy (odds ratio, 1.027; 95% CI, 1.015-1.040 and odds ratio, 1.030; 95% CI, 1.021-1.040, respectively). As the Mayo Clinic model-predicted probability of cancer increased, the sensitivity and positive predictive value of PET/CT imaging increased, whereas the specificity and negative predictive value dropped. Conclusions and Relevance: High false-positive rates were observed across a range of cancer prevalence. Normal PET/CT scans were not found to be reliable indicators of the absence of disease in patients with a high probability of lung cancer. In this population, aggressive tissue acquisition should be prioritized using a comprehensive lung nodule program that emphasizes advanced tissue acquisition techniques such as CT-guided fine-needle aspiration, navigational bronchoscopy, and endobronchial ultrasonography.

Indexed as

Positron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyAgedFalse Positive ReactionsFemaleFluorodeoxyglucose F18HumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedMultiple Pulmonary NodulesPredictive Value of TestsProbabilityRadiopharmaceuticalsRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsSolitary Pulmonary NoduleFluorodeoxyglucose F18Radiopharmaceuticals

Identifiers

PMID29117314
PMCPMC5910279
OpenAlexW2767909178

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.