ArticleNagoya journal of medical science2018
Assessment of tumor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer using MRI and FDG-PET/CT-RECIST 1.1 vs. PERCIST 1.0.
Article in Nagoya journal of medical science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- [La Radiologia medica · 2026Review
- Innovations in Positron Emission Tomography and State of the Art in the Evaluation of Breast Cancer Treatment Response.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Article
- Neoadjuvant chemotherapy response, disease-free survival, and overall survival of breast cancer in a single institution.Surgery open science · 2023Article
- Comparison of MRI vs. [Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Head-to-head comparisons of [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023Article
- The potential role of combined shear wave elastography and superb microvascular imaging for early prediction the pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- The Value ofMolecular imaging and radionuclide therapy · 2022Article
- Neoadjuvant presurgical PD-1 inhibition in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma.Cell reports. Medicine · 2021Article
- Prediction of pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: comparison of diagnostic performances of dedicated breast PET, whole-body PET, and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2021Article
- Feasibility of quantitative and volumetric enhancement measurement to assess tumor response in patients with breast cancer after early neoadjuvant chemotherapy.The Journal of international medical research · 2021Article
- Effect of Cisplatin Arterial Infusion (CAI) on Primary Nonmetastatic Pelvic Osteosarcoma: A Preliminary Study.Cancer management and research · 2021Article
- Imaging for Response Assessment in Cancer Clinical Trials.Seminars in nuclear medicine · 2020Article
- Clinical outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with breast cancer: Tri-weekly nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel followed by 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide: a retrospective observational study.Nagoya journal of medical science · 2020Observational
- Prognostic role of microRNA 182 and microRNA 18a in locally advanced triple negative breast cancer.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Therapeutic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for breast cancer based on Positron Emission Tomography Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (PERCIST) 1.0 with FDG-PET/CT measurements was evaluated, and the results compared to those obtained with currently widely used Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1, based on MRI measurements. MRI and FDG-PET/CT examinations were performed in 32 breast cancer patients before and after the NAC prior to a surgical resection. Chemotherapeutic response of the primary tumor and relapse-free survival (RFS) were investigated using RECIST 1.1 and PERCIST 1.0. Pathological complete response (pCR) was seen in 14 (43.8%) patients, while complete response (CR) was noted in 5, partial response in 25, stable disease in 2, and progressive disease in 0 with RECIST 1.1, and in 28, 2, 1, and 1, respectively, with PERCIST 1.0. For pCR prediction, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy with RECIST 1.1 were 28.6% (4/14), 94.4% (17/18), and 65.6% (21/32), and those with PERCIST 1.0 were 100% (14/14), 22.2% (4/18), and 56.3% (18/32). Five patients (15.6%) had recurrent development after a median period of 24 months (range 7.8-66.8 months). Patients who achieved CR shown by RECIST 1.1 showed slightly longer RFS than those who did not (p=0.46), whereas those with complete metabolic response (CMR) based on PERCIST 1.0 showed a relatively longer RFS than non-CMR patients (p=0.087). For prediction of pathological response to NAC in breast cancer, RECIST 1.1 and PERCIST 1.0 have complementary functions, however, FDG-PET as a post-NAC treatment assessment modality remains to be confirmed.
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.