ArticleOncology letters2018
Article in Oncology letters, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- FDG PET/CT in the post-treatment evaluation of breast cancer: an emphasis on triple-negative breast cancer.American journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Review
- Prognostic value of FDG PET/CT in de novo stage IV breast cancer patients treated with cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2025Article
- Innovations in Positron Emission Tomography and State of the Art in the Evaluation of Breast Cancer Treatment Response.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- State of the Art in 2022 PET/CT in Breast Cancer: A Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Analysis of Cross-Combinations of Feature Selection and Machine-Learning Classification Methods Based on [Cancers · 2022Article
- Response monitoring in metastatic breast cancer: a comparison of survival times between FDG-PET/CT and CE-CT.British journal of cancer · 2022Observational
- Clinical Impact of FDG-PET/CT Compared with CE-CT in Response Monitoring of Metastatic Breast Cancer.Cancers · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study aimed to explore the value of fludeoxyglucose F 18 positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT) for the early prediction of chemotherapy remission rates and survival in patients with recurrent and metastatic breast cancer. A total of 24 patients diagnosed with recurrent or metastatic breast cancer between 2009 and 2014 were enrolled. All patients underwent a PET/CT examination prior to (PET/CT1) and following (PET/CT2) chemotherapy. Differences of PET/CT1 maximal standardized uptake values (SUV
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.