SynthesisCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2019
Synthesis in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances in the diagnosis of myocarditis in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: an overview of diagnostic tests.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2024Review
- Cancer screening in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: Ten years experience from a single center.Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism · 2022Observational
- Additional Value of [18F]FDG PET/CT in Detection of Suspected Malignancy in Patients with Paraneoplastic Neurological Syndromes Having Negative Results of Conventional Radiological Imaging.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Paraneoplastic neurologic syndrome (pns) is a rare condition indirectly caused by an underlying malignancy. In many cases, the malignancy is occult at the time of the pns diagnosis, and the optimal diagnostic modality to detect the underlying tumour is unclear. In the present study, we aimed to assess the utility of Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from the PET Access Program (pap) database in the province of Ontario to identify patients who underwent fdg-pet/ct imaging as part of a workup for pns. In all patients, prior conventional imaging was negative or indeterminate. To determine the diagnostic accuracy of fdg-pet/ct, data about demographics, presenting symptoms, and biochemical and radiologic workup, including fdg-pet/ct imaging results, were compared with data collected by the Ontario Cancer Registry (ocr). A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis using our study inclusion criteria were performed for studies of fdg-pet accuracy. Results: Of 29 patients identified in the pap database, 9 had fdg-pet/ct results suspicious for malignancy. When correlated with data from the ocr, 5 fdg-pet/ct results were informative, resulting in a detection rate of 17%. Local sensitivity and specificity were 0.83 and 0.83 respectively. Two studies meeting our criteria were identified in the literature. The pooled sensitivity and specificity from the literature and local data were 0.88 and 0.90 respectively. Conclusions: When investigating for underlying malignancy in patients with suspected pns and negative conventional imaging, pet has high sensitivity and specificity.
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.