Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31646385›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2020

FDG-PET/CT in the surveillance of head and neck cancer following radiotherapy.

Louise Madeleine Risør, Annika Loft, Anne Kiil Berthelsen, Frederik Cornelius Loft, Andreas Ruhvald Madsen, Ivan Richter Vogelius, Andreas Kjær, Jeppe Friborg

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

8 authors.

Louise Madeleine RisørDepartment of Clinical Physiology, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Nuclear Medicine and PET and Cluster for Molecular Imaging, Rigshospitalet and University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. louise.madeleine.risoer@regionh.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0786-1204
Annika LoftDepartment of Clinical Physiology, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Nuclear Medicine and PET and Cluster for Molecular Imaging, Rigshospitalet and University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Anne Kiil BerthelsenDepartment of Clinical Physiology, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Nuclear Medicine and PET and Cluster for Molecular Imaging, Rigshospitalet and University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Frederik Cornelius LoftDepartment of Clinical Physiology, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Nuclear Medicine and PET and Cluster for Molecular Imaging, Rigshospitalet and University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Andreas Ruhvald MadsenDepartment of Clinical Physiology, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Nuclear Medicine and PET and Cluster for Molecular Imaging, Rigshospitalet and University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Ivan Richter VogeliusDepartment of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Andreas KjærDepartment of Clinical Physiology, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Nuclear Medicine and PET and Cluster for Molecular Imaging, Rigshospitalet and University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Jeppe FriborgDepartment of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo examine the time-dependent diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/CT in the follow-up of head and neck cancer (HNC) and to assess the prognostic value of PET-negative and PET-inconclusive findings. MATERIAL AND

methods279 HNC patients primarily treated with radiotherapy from 2006 to 2012 were included. The follow-up PET/CT scans were categorized as benign, malignant or inconclusive by a radiologist and a nuclear physician. The reference standard was histology or verification by progression on imaging. The outcome measures were positive (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV), and the PET/CT scans were grouped according to time since treatment and compared. An analysis of the diagnostic accuracy was performed with the inconclusive results categorized as both benign and malignant to create ranges for the diagnostic performance.

resultsThe proportion of inconclusive results declined from 26 to 8.4% and 0% after 0-3, 3-6 and 12-24 months post-treatment. The ranges for diagnostic performance after 0-3, 3-6, 6-12, 12-24 months and overall post-treatment were: PPV 27.3-50, 48.4-58.3, 71.4-100, 100 and 50.5-65.7 and NPV 75.0-84.6, 95.1-96.8, 92.9-100, 100 and 94.8-96.7. Time to recurrence was not statistically different after a PET-negative or a PET-inconclusive result.

conclusionThe diagnostic accuracy of a surveillance PET/CT scan after HNC improves with time since treatment, and is very reliable after 1 year. However, the NPV is already high 3 months post-treatment supporting the use of PET/CT for early evaluation of head and neck cancer patients.

Indexed as

Population SurveillancePositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyAdultAgedFemaleFluorodeoxyglucose F18Follow-Up StudiesHead and Neck NeoplasmsHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPrognosisRadiopharmaceuticalsFluorodeoxyglucose F18RadiopharmaceuticalsFDG-PET/CTFollow-upHead and neck cancerNuclear medicineOncologyRadiotherapySurveillance

Identifiers

PMID31646385

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.