ReviewPediatric radiology2019
Functional and anatomical imaging in pediatric oncology: which is best for which tumors.
Review in Pediatric radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Pediatric sarcomas].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Combination of clinical parameters andQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Positron emission tomography in the diagnosis and management of primary pediatric lung tumors.Pediatric radiology · 2024Review
- Comparison of the different imaging modalities used to image pediatric oncology patients: A COG diagnostic imaging committee/SPR oncology committee white paper.Pediatric blood & cancer · 2023Article
- Gene expression-based dissection of inter-histotypes, intra-histotype and intra-tumor heterogeneity in pediatric tumors.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- GEIS-SEHOP clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of rhabdomyosarcoma.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Functional imaging techniques are playing an increasingly important role in the management of pediatric cancer. Technological advances have pushed the development of hybrid imaging techniques, including positron emission tomography (PET)/CT, PET/MR and single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)/CT. Together with an increasing need to identify surrogate biomarkers for response to novel therapies, the use of functional imaging techniques, which had been reserved primarily for lymphoma patients, is now being recognized as standard of care for the management of many other pediatric solid tumors. The purpose of this review is to summarize recent data describing the use of functional and metabolic imaging strategies for the staging and response assessment of common pediatric solid tumors, and to offer some guidance as to which techniques are most appropriate for which tumor types.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31620853What 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.