ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2019
Prognostic value of
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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pixel-based small-window parametric ultrasound imaging for liver tumor characterization.Biomedical engineering letters · 2024Article
- Prognostic value of TLR from FDG PET/CT in patients with margin-negative stage IB and IIA non-small cell lung cancer.European radiology · 2023Article
- Non-invasive imaging in the diagnosis of combined hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2023Review
- An international multicentre evaluation of treatment strategies for combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinomaJHEP reports : innovation in hepatology · 2023Article
- Article
- Prognostic value of LI-RADS category on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI and 18F-FDG PET-CT in patients with primary liver carcinomas.European radiology · 2021Article
- Article
- FDG-PET/CT imaging findings of hepatic tumors and tumor-like lesions based on molecular background.Japanese journal of radiology · 2020Review
- The PET-Derived Tumor-to-Liver Standard Uptake Ratio (SUVFrontiers in oncology · 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
Abstract
purposeThe prognostic value of pretreatment
methodsA total of 46 patients with cHCC-CC who underwent FDG PET/CT before treatment were retrospectively analysed. Tumour FDG avidity was measured in terms of the tumour-to-normal liver standardized uptake value ratio (TLR) of the primary tumour on FDG PET/CT. The prognostic significance of TLR using the median value of 3.4 as the cut-off value and other clinical variables was assessed using Cox proportional hazards regression models. Differences in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in relation to TLR were examined by the Kaplan-Meier method.
resultsDuring a median follow-up period of 29 months, 29 patients (63.0%) showed tumour recurrence or progression, and 25 patients (54.4%) died from cancer. Higher TLRs (>3.4) were associated with larger tumour size (p = 0.007) and higher tumour stage (p = 0.030). In a univariable analysis, TLR, tumour stage and CEA were significant prognostic predictors. In a multivariable analysis, TLR was an independent predictor of PFS (HR 5.19, 95% CI 1.80-15.01; p = 0.002) and OS (HR 3.95, 95% CI 1.27-12.24; p = 0.017). Patients with a higher TLR showed significantly worse PFS (2-year survival rate 17.8% vs. 62.9%; p = 0.001) and OS (2-year survival rate, 39.1% vs. 77.3%; p = 0.001) than those with a lower TLR.
conclusionPretreatment TLR of the primary tumour measured on FDG PET/CT is an independent predictor of survival in patients with cHCC-CC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31049603What 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.