ArticleJournal of investigative medicine high impact case reports
FDG-PET Versus PSMA-PET: A Patient With Prostate Cancer.
Article in Journal of investigative medicine high impact case reports. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Omics-Mediated Treatment for Advanced Prostate Cancer: Moving Towards Precision Oncology.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Synchronous Colorectal and Prostate Cancer: Dual PET/CT Approach for Detecting and Distinguishing Metastatic Patterns.Nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023Article
- Article
- Beyond the Prognostic Value of 2-[Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Normal Variants, Pitfalls, and Artifacts in Ga-68 Prostate Specific Membrane Antigen (PSMA) PET/CT Imaging.Frontiers in nuclear medicine · 2022Review
- Evolving Castration Resistance and Prostate Specific Membrane Antigen Expression: Implications for Patient Management.Cancers · 2021Review
- Dual-Tracer Positron-Emission Tomography Using Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen and Fluorodeoxyglucose for Staging of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.Advances in urology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A 64-year old male presented to the hospital with a 1-week history of stools with bright red blood. Subsequent colonoscopy with a biopsy revealed a low-lying, moderately differentiated, rectal adenocarcinoma. A pelvic magnetic resonance imaging done afterwards showed a possible T3N1 rectal cancer with intact muscularis mucosa and a singular presacral lymph node enlargement. Furthermore, a suspicious peripheral prostatic enlargement and a possible left iliac crest sclerotic bone lesion were incidentally identified.
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.