Trial reportEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2018
The role of interim
Trial report in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
53 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 100 citations in OpenAlex.
- The value ofEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2021Pooled it
- Twenty Years On: RECIST as a Biomarker of Response in Solid Tumours an EORTC Imaging Group - ESOI Joint Paper.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Prognostic value of different metabolic response criteria in patients with advanced melanoma treated with immunotherapy: a comparative analysis of PECRIT, PERCIMT, and EORTC criteria.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Applications and research progress of PET/CT in dynamic monitoring of immunotherapy in melanoma.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Review
- FDG PET Hybrid Imaging.Recent results in cancer research. Fortschritte der Krebsforschung. Progres dans les recherches sur le cancer · 2026Review
- Imaging Immunotherapy.Recent results in cancer research. Fortschritte der Krebsforschung. Progres dans les recherches sur le cancer · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence for immunotherapy response assessment in lung cancer using PET/CT reports.Japanese journal of radiology · 2025Article
- Advances in Multimodal Imaging Techniques for Evaluating and Predicting the Efficacy of Immunotherapy for NSCLC.Cancer management and research · 2025Review
- [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Article
- FDG PET/CT Imaging 1 Week after a Single Dose of Pembrolizumab Predicts Treatment Response in Patients with Advanced Melanoma.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2024Article
- Article
- ImmunoPET provides a novel way to visualize the CD103EJNMMI research · 2024Review
- Tumor therapeutics in the era of "RECIST": past, current insights, and future prospects.Oncology reviews · 2024Review
- The prognostic value of [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023Article
- ITA-IMMUNO-PET: The Role of [18F]FDG PET/CT for Assessing Response to Immunotherapy in Patients with Some Solid Tumors.Cancers · 2023Article
- Predictive value ofFrontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- Molecular imaging to support cancer immunotherapy.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2022Review
- Article
- Joint EANM/SNMMI/ANZSNM practice guidelines/procedure standards on recommended use of [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of the present study was to assess the value of interim
methodsThe study group comprised 41 patients with unresectable metastatic melanoma scheduled for ipilimumab therapy. Whole-body
resultsAccording to their best clinical response, the patients were divided into two groups: those showing clinical benefit (CB) including stable disease, partial response and complete response (31 patients), and those showing no clinical benefit (no-CB including progressive disease (10 patients). According to the EORTC criteria, interim PET/CT demonstrated progressive metabolic disease (PMD) in 20 patients, stable metabolic disease (SMD) in 11 patients, partial metabolic response (PMR) in 8 patients, and complete metabolic response (CMR) in 2 patients. According to the PERCIMT, interim PET/CT demonstrated PMD in 9 patients, SMD in 24 patients, PMR in 6 patients and CMR in 2 patients. On the basis of the interim PET, the patients were divided in a similar manner to the division according to clinical response into those showing metabolic benefit (MB) including SMD, PMR and CMR, and those showing no metabolic benefit (no-MB) including PMD. According to this dichotomization, the EORTC criteria showed a sensitivity (correctly predicting CB) of 64.5%, a specificity (correctly predicting no-CB) of 90.0%, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 95.2%, a negative predictive value (NPV) of 45.0% and an accuracy of 70.7% in predicting best clinical response. The PERCIMT showed a sensitivity of 93.6%, a specificity of 70.0%, a PPV of 90.6%, a NPV of 77.8% and an accuracy of 87.8%. The McNemar test showed that the PERCIMT had a significantly higher sensitivity than EORTC criteria (p = 0.004), while there was no significant difference in specificity (p = 0.5). The agreement between the two sets of criteria was poor (McNemar test p = 0.001, and accordingly kappa = 0.46).
conclusionThe application of the recently proposed PERCIMT to interim
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.