ReviewAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2019
RESISTing the Need to Quantify: Putting Qualitative FDG-PET/CT Tumor Response Assessment Criteria into Daily Practice.
Review in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- First-in-Humans Evaluation of Safety and Dosimetry ofJournal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2023Article
- Performance of NI-RADS on CECT Alone to Predict Recurrent Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma after Chemoradiotherapy: Added Value of RECIST 1.1.The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2022Article
- Positron Emission Tomographic Imaging of Tumor Cell Death Using Zirconium-89-Labeled APOMAB® Following Cisplatin Chemotherapy in Lung and Ovarian Cancer Xenograft Models.Molecular imaging and biology · 2021Article
- Improved non-invasive positron emission tomographic imaging of chemotherapy-induced tumor cell death using Zirconium-89-labeled APOMAB®.EJNMMI radiopharmacy and chemistry · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tumor response assessments are essential to evaluate cancer treatment efficacy and prognosticate survival in patients with cancer. Response criteria have evolved over multiple decades, including many imaging modalities and measurement schema. Advances in FDG-PET/CT have led to tumor response criteria that harness the power of metabolic imaging. Qualitative PET/CT assessment schema are easy to apply clinically, are reproducible, and yield good prognostic results. We present 3 such criteria, namely, the Lugano classification for lymphoma, the Hopkins criteria, and the Neck Imaging Reporting and Data Systems criteria for head and neck cancers. When comparing baseline PET/CTs with interim or end-of-treatment PET/CTs, radiologists can classify the tumor response as complete metabolic response, partial metabolic response, no metabolic response, or progressive disease, which has important implications in directing further cancer management and long-term patient prognosis. The purpose of this article is to review the progression of tumor response assessments from CT- and PET/CT-based quantitative and semi-quantitative systems to PET/CT-based qualitative systems; introduce the classification schema for these systems; and describe how to use these rapid, powerful, and qualitative PET/CT-based systems in daily practice through illustrative cases.
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.