Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31443324›Full record

ArticleCancers2019

FDG-PET/CT for Response Monitoring in Metastatic Breast Cancer: Today, Tomorrow, and Beyond.

Malene Grubbe Hildebrandt, Jeppe Faurholdt Lauridsen, Marianne Vogsen, Jorun Holm, Mie Holm Vilstrup, Poul-Erik Braad, Oke Gerke, Mads Thomassen, Marianne Ewertz, Poul Flemming Høilund-Carlsen and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Cost-effectiveness of 2-[Scientific reports · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Frontiers in oncology · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Malene Grubbe HildebrandtDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University Hospital, 5000 Odense, Denmark. Malene.grubbe.hildebrandt@rsyd.dk.ORCID 0000-0003-2720-9018
Jeppe Faurholdt LauridsenDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Lillebaelt Hospital, 7100 Vejle, Denmark.
Marianne VogsenDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University Hospital, 5000 Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-6124-4063
Jorun HolmDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University Hospital, 5000 Odense, Denmark.
Mie Holm VilstrupDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University Hospital, 5000 Odense, Denmark.
Poul-Erik BraadDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University Hospital, 5000 Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-4906-5422
Oke GerkeDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University Hospital, 5000 Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-6335-3303
Mads ThomassenDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, 5230 Odense, Denmark.
Marianne EwertzDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, 5230 Odense, Denmark.
Poul Flemming Høilund-CarlsenDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University Hospital, 5000 Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-7420-2367
Centre for Personalized Response Monitoring in Oncology (PREMIO)
University of Southern Denmark · DKOdense University Hospital · DKLillebaelt Hospital · DK

Funding

The Independant Research Fund, Denmark 7016-00359B
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While current international guidelines include imaging of the target lesion for response monitoring in metastatic breast cancer, they do not provide specific recommendations for choice of imaging modality or response criteria. This is important as clinical decisions may vary depending on which imaging modality is used for monitoring metastatic breast cancer. FDG-PET/CT has shown high accuracy in diagnosing metastatic breast cancer, and the Positron Emission Tomography Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (PERCIST) have shown higher predictive values than the CT-based Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) for prediction of progression-free survival. No studies have yet addressed the clinical impact of using different imaging modalities or response evaluation criteria for longitudinal response monitoring in metastatic breast cancer. We present a case study of a patient with metastatic breast cancer who was monitored first with conventional CT and then with FDG-PET/CT. We retrospectively applied PERCIST to evaluate the longitudinal response to treatment. We used the one-lesion PERCIST model measuring SULpeak in the hottest metastatic lesion on consecutive scans. This model provides a continuous variable that allows graphical illustration of disease fluctuation along with response categories. The one-lesion PERCIST approach seems able to reflect molecular changes and has the potential to support clinical decision-making. Prospective clinical studies addressing the clinical impact of PERCIST in metastatic breast cancer are needed to establish evidence-based recommendations for response monitoring in this disease.

Indexed as

FDG-PET/CTmetastatic breast cancerPERCISTprecision oncology

Identifiers

PMID31443324
PMCPMC6721531
OpenAlexW2968164870

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.