Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34439232›Full record

ArticleCancers2021

Clinical Impact of FDG-PET/CT Compared with CE-CT in Response Monitoring of Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Mohammad Naghavi-Behzad, Hjalte Rasmus Oltmann, Tural Asgharzadeh Alamdari, Jakob Lykke Bülow, Lasse Ljungstrøm, Poul-Erik Braad, Jon Thor Asmussen, Marianne Vogsen, Annette Raskov Kodahl, Oke Gerke and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Cost-effectiveness of 2-[Scientific reports · 2023
    Article
  4. 2-[Scientific reports · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Mohammad Naghavi-BehzadDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, 5000 Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-6761-8126
Hjalte Rasmus OltmannDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, 5000 Odense, Denmark.
Tural Asgharzadeh AlamdariDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, 5000 Odense, Denmark.
Jakob Lykke BülowDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, 5000 Odense, Denmark.
Lasse LjungstrømDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, 5000 Odense, Denmark.
Poul-Erik BraadDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, 5000 Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-4906-5422
Jon Thor AsmussenDepartment of Radiology, Odense University Hospital, 5000 Odense, Denmark.
Marianne VogsenDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, 5000 Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-6124-4063
Annette Raskov KodahlDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, 5000 Odense, Denmark.
Oke GerkeDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, 5000 Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-6335-3303
Malene Grubbe HildebrandtDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, 5000 Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-2720-9018

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We compared response categories and impacts on treatment decisions for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients that are response-monitored with contrast-enhanced computed-tomography (CE-CT) or fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT). A comparative diagnostic study was performed on MBC patients undergoing response monitoring by CE-CT (

Indexed as

clinical impactFDG-PET/CTmetastatic breast cancerresponse monitoring

Identifiers

PMID34439232
PMCPMC8392540

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.