ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2019
Prognostic analysis of interim
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- A prospective study on early PET/CT scans during the first cycle of salvage chemotherapy for relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.Leukemia & lymphoma · 2022Trial
- Differentiating lymphoma progression from benign lesions: features of incident [Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluating ΔMTV%, ΔDDiscover oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Predicting diffuse large B-cell lymphoma outcomes with lesion-to-liver maximum standardized uptake value for interim-treatment and end-of-treatment positron emission tomography-computed tomography.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Analysis of Positive Results ofDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Aberrant patterns of PET response during treatment for DLBCL patients with MYC gene rearrangements.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022Article
- Risk Assessment in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma by Combining Baseline Metabolic Tumor Volume and Peking Criteria When Evaluating SeriesFrontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- PET Molecular Imaging: A Holistic Review of Current Practice and Emerging Perspectives for Diagnosis, Therapeutic Evaluation and Prognosis in Clinical Oncology.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Early Interim Chemotherapy Response Evaluation by F-18 FDG PET/CT in Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Progression Free Survival and Predictor of Recurrence in DLBCL patients with Negative Interim 18FDG PET/CT Using Standardized Imaging and Reporting Protocols.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2020Article
- RESISTing the Need to Quantify: Putting Qualitative FDG-PET/CT Tumor Response Assessment Criteria into Daily Practice.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2019Review
- Predictive value of interim FDG-PET/CT findings in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with R-CHOP.Oncotarget · 2019Article
- Molecular characteristics of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in the Positron Emission Tomography-Guided Therapy of Aggressive Non-Hodgkin lymphomas (PETAL) trial: correlation with interim PET and outcome.Blood cancer journal · 2019Article
- Risk Stratification Of Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma With Interim PET/CT By Combining Deauville Scores And International Prognostic Index.Cancer management and research · 2019Article
- The Minimal Residual Disease in Non-Hodgkin's Lymphomas: From the Laboratory to the Clinical Practice.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectives
methodsSixty primary DLBCL patients (31 females) were analyzed. Baseline and follow-up
resultsThe optimal cutoff for the prediction of treatment outcome was a ΔSUVmax% of 57% (after one cycle) and 63% (after two cycles); we could not detect a difference in accuracy with respect to a PET scan performed after one cycle and two cycles of chemotherapy (P > 0.05). The ΔSUVmax% and the D-5PS (score 5) showed the highest prognostic value compared to a score of 3 and/or 4 (both after one cycle and two cycles). No significant difference in sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, or the area of under the curve (AUC) of ΔSUVmax% and D-5PS (score 5) was observed between PETs performed after one cycle or two cycles of therapy (P > 0.05). ΔSUVmax%, D-5PS (score 5), and MYC gene rearrangement correlated significantly (P < 0.001).
conclusionInterim
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.