ArticleMolecular imaging and radionuclide therapy2020
The Prognostic Value of
Article in Molecular imaging and radionuclide therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Image Analysis as tool for Predicting Colorectal Cancer Molecular Alterations: A Scoping Review.Molecular imaging and radionuclide therapy · 2025Article
- Predictive role of [EJNMMI reports · 2024Article
- Preoperative metabolic parameters ofQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- Correlations among KRAS Mutation, Microsatellite Instability, and 18F-FDG Uptake in Colon Cancer.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2022Article
- Correlation betweenAbdominal radiology (New York) · 2022Article
- Multi-Omic Approaches in Colorectal Cancer beyond Genomic Data.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Review
- Predictive value ofF1000Research · 2022Review
- Radiogenomics in Colorectal Cancer.Cancers · 2021Review
- Clinical Significance and Prognostic Value of the Maximum Standardized Uptake Value ofFrontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- KRAS mutation effects on the 2-[18F]FDG PET uptake of colorectal adenocarcinoma metastases in the liver.EJNMMI research · 2020Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Prognostic effect of KRAS mutation and side of tumor in colorectal cancer is a highly controversial subject. Therefore, we evaluated the association between FDG uptake pattern in Methods: Eighty-three patients with colorectal cancer were retrospectively included in this study. Results: Twenty five patients were female while 58 were male. The mean age of the patients was 59.8±11.3 years. Mean follow-up was 35.5±18.9 months. Primary tumor was localized in the left colon in 83.1% of patients and in the right colon in 16.9%. KRAS mutation was detected in 54.2% (n=45) of patients. Mean SUV Conclusion: In our study, we found that tumor localization had no significant effect on prognosis in patients with colon cancer. On the other hand, FDG uptake was observed to be higher in the presence of KRAS mutation and it was concluded that coexistence of KRAS mutation with higher SUV
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.