ArticleScientific reports2020
Predictive value of suvmax changes between two sequential post-therapeutic FDG-pet in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use of Deep Neural Networks in the Detection and Automated Classification of Lesions Using Clinical Images in Ophthalmology, Dermatology, and Oral Medicine-A Systematic Review.Journal of digital imaging · 2023Pooled it
- PET/CT contouring techniques in neuroendocrine neoplasms: a state-of-the-art scoping review.EJNMMI reports · 2026Review
- Diagnostic value, sensitivity and specificity of CT, MRI, and PET in evaluation of cartilage invasion in laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancer.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in the Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prognosis of Hypopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Scoping Review.Clinical medicine & research · 2025Article
- Recurrence Detection by Hybrid [Head & neck · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
18-flurodesoxyglucose position emission tomography (FDG-PET) with computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a broadly accepted tool for pretherapeutic staging and post-therapeutic assessment of response. The prognostic value of sequential post-therapeutic FDG-PETs and the impact of change in metabolic activity has been scarcely reported so far. We hypothesized that an increase in metabolic activity (as measured by maximum standardized uptake value, SUVmax) would be predictive for recurrence. We retrospectively assessed all oral, oropharyngeal, laryngeal, and hypopharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma patients treated at the Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Zurich between April 1st, 2010 and September 30th, 2018 (N = 337). After a negative post-treatment FDG-PET at 3 months, we measured the SUVmax of the local tumor area and the regional lymph nodes on follow-up FDG-PET at 9 months. We then correlated SUVmax difference between 9 and 3 months with tumor recurrence using Kaplan Meier analysis. During follow-up, 68 patients (20.2%) had local recurrence and 53 had regional recurrence (15.7%) at a median time of 9.0 (IQR 4.25-14) and 7.0 (IQR 5.25-23) months, respectively. An increase in local and/or regional SUVmax from the 3 months to the 9 months post-therapeutic FDG-PET resulted in a poorer recurrence-free survival (Log rank, P = 0.001, for both). An increase in local SUVmax between 3 and 9 months was associated with a hazard ratio of 4.17 for recurrence (95%CI 1.89-9.2, P = 0.0003). In conclusion, an increase in metabolic activity/SUVmax between two post-therapeutic FDG-PETs requires a histological examination as it is associated with tumor recurrence.
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.