ArticleEJNMMI research2021
[
Article in EJNMMI research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of routine FDG-PET/CT on locoregional treatment decisions in breast cancer patients receiving preoperative systemic therapy.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2025Article
- Prone versus Supine FDG PET/CT in the Staging of Breast Cancer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAxillary staging before neoadjuvant systemic therapy in clinically node-positive breast cancer patients with tailored axillary treatment according to the Marking Axillary lymph nodes with radioactive iodine seeds (MARI)-protocol, a protocol developed at the Netherlands Cancer Institute, is performed with [
methodsWe selected patients with FDG-PET/CT in supine and prone position who underwent the MARI-protocol. One hour after administration of 3.5 MBq/kg, [
resultsOf 153 patients included, 24 (16%) patients were up- or downstaged at evaluation of prone images: One observer upstaged 14 patients, downstaged 3 patients and reported a higher number of ALNs (3.6 vs. 3.2, p < 0.001), while staging (4 up- and 5 downstaged) and number of ALNs (2.8 vs. 2.8) did not differ for the other. Observers agreed on up- or downstaging in only 1 (1%) patient. Irrespective of supine or prone position scanning, observers agreed on axillary staging in 124 (81%) patients and disagreed in 5 (3%). Interobserver agreement was lower with prone assessments (86%, K = 0.67) than supine (92%, K = 0.80).
conclusionsAxillary staging with FDG-PET/CT in prone compared to supine position did not result in concordant up- or downstaging. Therefore, FDG-PET/CT in supine position only can be considered sufficient for axillary staging.
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.