ArticleMedical physics2021
Macrovasculature and positron emission tomography (PET) standardized uptake value in patients with lung cancer.
Article in Medical physics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Nanoparticle trends and hotspots in lung cancer diagnosis from 2006-2023: a bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the relationship between macrovasculature features and the standardized uptake value (SUV) of positron emission tomography (PET), which is a surrogate for the metabolic activity of a lung tumor.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed a cohort of 90 lung cancer patients who had both chest CT and PET-CT examinations before receiving cancer treatment. The SUVs in the medical reports were used. We quantified three macrovasculature features depicted on CT images (i.e., vessel number, vessel volume, and vessel tortuosity) and several tumor features (i.e., volume, maximum diameter, mean diameter, surface area, and density). Tumor size (e.g., volume) was used as a covariate to adjust for possible confounding factors. Backward stepwise multiple regression analysis was performed to develop a model for predicting PET SUV from the relevant image features. The Bonferroni correction was used for multiple comparisons.
resultsPET SUV was positively correlated with vessel volume (R = 0.44, p < 0.001) and vessel number (R = 0.44, p < 0.001) but not with vessel tortuosity (R = 0.124, p > 0.05). After adjusting for tumor size, PET SUV was significantly correlated with vessel tortuosity (R = 0.299, p = 0.004) and vessel number (R = 0.224, p = 0.035), but only marginally correlated with vessel volume (R = 0.187, p = 0.079). The multiple regression model showed a performance with an R-Squared of 0.391 and an adjusted R-Squared of 0.355 (p < 0.001).
conclusionsOur investigations demonstrate the potential relationship between macrovasculature and PET SUV and suggest the possibility of inferring the metabolic activity of a lung tumor from chest CT images.
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.