SynthesisEuropean journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990)2021
Impact of
Synthesis in European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating artificial intelligence into cancers of unknown primary diagnosis and treatment.iScience · 2026Review
- Diagnosis of Occult Cancer Using Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/CT in Cryptogenic Stroke Patients.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Article
- Outcomes and molecular profiles in sarcomatoid carcinoma of unknown primary: the Mayo Clinic experience.The oncologist · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Utility of a 90-Gene Expression Assay (Canhelp-Origin) for Patients with Metastatic Cancer with an Unclear or Unknown Diagnosis.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2025Article
- Personalised PET imaging in oncology: an umbrella review of meta-analyses to guide the appropriate radiopharmaceutical choice and indication.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Review
- Article
- Advances in Cancer Research: Current and Future Diagnostic and Therapeutic Strategies.Biosensors · 2024Review
- Utility ofClinical Medicine Insights. Oncology · 2024Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCancers of unknown primary (CUP) have traditionally been treated empirically, with a dismal prognosis. Compared with standard diagnostic tests, including CT and MRI, imaging with MATERIALS AND
methodsPubmed and EMBASE databases were searched up to 4th February 2021. Studies that reported the proportion of patients with CUP who experienced a management change after FDG-PET or PET/ computed tomography (CT) were included and the proportions were pooled using the random-effects model. Study quality was assessed using QUADAS-2. Subgroup analysis was conducted to explore heterogeneity.
resultsThirty-eight studies (involving 2795 patients) were included. The pooled proportion of patients with management changes was 35% (95% confidence interval 31%-40%). There was substantial heterogeneity among the studies (Q-test, p < 0.01; I
conclusionFDG-PET or PET/CT had a meaningful impact on the management of patients with CUP. Approximately, a third of patients had their management changed because of FDG-PET or PET/CT results, and this finding was consistent across numerous subgroups.
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.