ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2022
Diagnostic value of
Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Circulating Tumor DNA in Neurofibromatosis Type 1: Translating Molecular Discovery into Clinical Surveillance.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Utility of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the Surveillance of Patients With Neurofibromatosis Type 1.Neurology. Genetics · 2026Article
- Primary Intraosseous Malignant Nerve Sheath Tumor Of Humerus Presenting With Pathological Fracture: A Rare Case Report With Review Of Literature.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2026Article
- FAP expression as a marker of malignant transformation enabling in vivo characterization in peripheral nerve sheath tumors: a multimodal and translational study.Acta neuropathologica · 2026Article
- Case Report: Giant L1 dumbbell-shaped spinal schwannoma with osteolytic destruction and intense [Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- The role of radiotherapy in MPNST and the impact of NF1 status on outcomes: Insights from a multicenter cohort study.Neuro-oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Comprehensive neurosurgical and visceral surgical therapy of retroperitoneal nerve tumors: a descriptive and retrospective analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Overview of F18-FDG uptake patterns in retroperitoneal pathologies: imaging findings, pitfalls, and artifacts.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Review
- Local recurrence in malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumours: multicentre cohort study.BJS open · 2024Article
- Diagnosis and management of neurofibromatosis type 1 in Arabian Gulf Cooperation Council Region: challenges and recommendations.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- Myxoid solitary fibrous tumor with rapid growth due to increased mucinous components: a case report.General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery cases · 2023Article
- Optimized low-dose positron emission tomography/computed tomography schemes in pediatric tumor patients: a randomized clinical trial.Translational pediatrics · 2022Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDetecting malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNSTs) remains difficult.
methodsA retrospective cohort study was performed including patients from two hospitals with a clinical or radiological suspicion of MPNST between 2013 and 2019. Several markers were studied for ideal threshold values and differences among adults and children. A diagnostic algorithm was subsequently developed.
resultsSixty patients were included (10 MPNSTs). Ideal threshold values were 5.8 for SUVmax (sensitivity 0.70, specificity 0.92), 5.0 for SUVpeak (sensitivity 0.70, specificity 0.97), 1.7 for TLmax (sensitivity 0.90, specificity 0.86), and 2.3 for TLmean (sensitivity 0.90, specificity 0.79). The standard TLmean threshold value of 2.0 yielded a sensitivity of 0.90 and specificity of 0.74, while the standard SUVmax threshold value of 3.5 yielded a sensitivity of 0.80 and specificity of 0.63. SUVmax and adjusted SUV for lean body mass (SUL) were lower in children, but tumor-to-liver ratios were similar in adult and pediatric lesions. Using TLmean > 2.0 or TLmean < 2.0 and SUVmax > 3.5, a sensitivity and specificity of 1.00 and 0.63 can be achieved.
conclusion
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.