ArticleJapanese journal of radiology2018
Simultaneous whole-body and breast 18F-FDG PET/MRI examinations in patients with breast cancer: a comparison of apparent diffusion coefficients and maximum standardized uptake values.
Article in Japanese journal of radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hybrid [Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Multimodal imaging and advanced quantitative techniques for HER-2 status prediction in breast cancer.Discover oncology · 2025Review
- The influence of receptor expression and clinical subtypes on baseline [18F]FDG uptake in breast cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.EJNMMI research · 2023Review
- Clinical advances in PET-MRI for breast cancer.The Lancet. Oncology · 2022Review
- Associations Between PET Parameters and Expression of Ki-67 in Breast Cancer.Translational oncology · 2019Article
- Does integrated shimming improve lesion detection in whole-body diffusion-weighted examinations of patients with breast cancer?Japanese journal of radiology · 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
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare standardized uptake value (SUV) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values acquired using a PET/MRI scanner in breast cancer patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsWhole-body PET/MRI and breast PET/MRI were performed in 108 consecutive patients. Ninety-four patients who had a total of 100 breast cancers were analyzed. SUVmax and ADCmean acquired using breast PET/MRI were compared with pathologic prognostic factors.
resultsAll the lesions were visually detectable using PET and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) on breast PET/MRI; however, lesions were visually undetectable on whole-body DWI in 13 patients (13%) or on whole-body PET in 7 patients (7%). An analysis of ADCmean and SUVmax demonstrated a statistically significant correlation between whole-body imaging and breast imaging (rho = 0.613, p < 0.001 and rho = 0.928, p < 0.001, respectively). In a univariate analysis, SUVmax was significantly correlated with HER2 status (p < 0.001), Ki-67 (p = 0.014), tumor size (p = 0.0177), and nuclear grade (p = 0.0448). In multiple regression analysis, only tumor size (p = 0.00701) was shown to independently influence SUVmax.
conclusionProne breast imaging was more sensitive than whole-body PET/MRI for detection of breast cancers. Both SUVmax and ADCmean showed limited correlation with pathologic prognostic factors.
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.