ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2020
Succinate detection using in vivo
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Detection of elevated succinate in brain during circulatory arrest in a piglet model: A 3TMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2025Article
- SDH defective cancers: molecular mechanisms and treatment strategies.Cell biology and toxicology · 2025Review
- Knowledge-Based Therapeutics for Tricarboxylic Acid (TCA) Cycle-Deficient Cancers.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine · 2024Review
- Imaging of Pheochromocytomas and Paragangliomas.Endocrine reviews · 2024Review
- Image-Guided Precision Medicine in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Pheochromocytomas and Paragangliomas.Cancers · 2023Review
- Metabolomics in paraganglioma: applications and perspectives from genetics to therapy.Endocrine-related cancer · 2023Article
- SDHx mutation and pituitary adenoma: can in vivo 1H-MR spectroscopy unravel the link?Endocrine-related cancer · 2023Article
- Imaging glucose metabolism to reveal tumor progression.Frontiers in physiology · 2023Review
- Head and Neck Paragangliomas: An Update on the Molecular Classification, State-of-the-Art Imaging, and Management Recommendations.Radiology. Imaging cancer · 2022Review
- Adrenal pheochromocytoma: is it all or the tip of the iceberg?Japanese journal of radiology · 2022Review
- Texture analysis of T2-weighted MRI predicts SDH mutation in paraganglioma.Neuroradiology · 2021Article
- What Have We Learned from Molecular Biology of Paragangliomas and Pheochromocytomas?Endocrine pathology · 2021Review
- Comprehensive review of evaluation and management of cardiac paragangliomas.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeGermline mutations in genes encoding succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) are frequent in patients with pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma (PPGL). They lead to SDH inactivation, mediating a massive accumulation of succinate, which constitutes a highly specific biomarker of SDHx-mutated tumors when measured in vitro. In a recent pilot study, we showed that magnetic resonance spectroscopy (
methodsForty-nine patients presenting with 50 PPGLs were prospectively enrolled in our referral center for
resultsA succinate peak was observed in 20 tumors, all of which had proven SDH deficiency using the gold standard (17 patients with germline SDHx mutations, 2 with a somatic SDHD mutation, and 1 with negative SDHB IHC and SDH loss of function). A false negative result was observed in 3 tumors. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of
conclusionsDetection of succinate using
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.