ReviewEuropean journal of hybrid imaging2019
Prevalence of focal incidental breast uptake on FDG-PET/CT and risk of malignancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in European journal of hybrid imaging, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Joint EANM-SNMMI guideline on the role of 2-[European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Guideline
- Prevalence and significance of incidental findings on 68 Ga-DOTA-conjugated somatostatin receptor-targeting peptide PET/CT: a systematic review of the literature.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2022Pooled it
- The Prevalence and Malignancy Risk of Breast Incidental Uptake Detected by PET/CT with Different Radiopharmaceuticals: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Focal incidental colorectal fluorodeoxyglucose uptake: Should it be spotlighted?World journal of clinical cases · 2024Article
- Unexpected focal fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in main organs; pass through or pass by?World journal of clinical cases · 2024Review
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
Abstract
backgroundFDG-PET/CT is increasingly used for oncologic and inflammatory diseases. Focal incidental FDG uptake occurs rarely in breast tissue but has often significant consequences. This study aimed to systematically review literature regarding focal incidental breast uptake (FIBU) on FDG-PET/CT in order to yield an update on the prevalence and risk of malignancy for FIBU.
methodsA systematic search for relevant articles published between 2012 and 2018 was performed through MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Studies addressing the detection of FIBU in patients without a previous history of breast malignancy were included. The QUADAS-2 was used for quality assessment, and eligible data were pooled using a fixed-effects model. I
resultsEight studies containing 180,002 scans were included in the systematic review. The median prevalence of FIBU for both genders was 0.52% (range 0.18-22.5%). Prevalence for women was mentioned separately in five studies and varied from 0.51 to 23.5%. One study reporting a high prevalence was based on patients being staged for known malignancy, and the word "breast" was used in the search, which may have caused selection bias. Data from four studies were eligible for meta-analysis. A high degree of heterogeneity was observed for prevalence data (I
conclusionFIBU occurs rarely on FDG-PET/CT for female patients but yields a high risk of malignancy according to the results of published papers. Therefore, it should be considered relevant to further elucidate patients with incidentally detected FDG uptake in breast in clinical practice.
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.