Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35096590›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

Pretherapeutic Assessment of Pancreatic Cancer: Comparison of FDG PET/CT Plus Delayed PET/MR and Contrast-Enhanced CT/MR.

Zaizhu Zhang, Nina Zhou, Xiaoyi Guo, Nan Li, Hua Zhu, Zhi Yang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. [Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. The value ofQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023
    Article
  7. Review
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Zaizhu ZhangKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), NMPA Key Laboratory for Research and Evaluation of Radiopharmaceuticals (National Medical Products Administration), Department of Nuclear Medicine; Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Nina ZhouKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), NMPA Key Laboratory for Research and Evaluation of Radiopharmaceuticals (National Medical Products Administration), Department of Nuclear Medicine; Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Xiaoyi GuoKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), NMPA Key Laboratory for Research and Evaluation of Radiopharmaceuticals (National Medical Products Administration), Department of Nuclear Medicine; Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Nan LiKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), NMPA Key Laboratory for Research and Evaluation of Radiopharmaceuticals (National Medical Products Administration), Department of Nuclear Medicine; Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Hua ZhuKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), NMPA Key Laboratory for Research and Evaluation of Radiopharmaceuticals (National Medical Products Administration), Department of Nuclear Medicine; Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Zhi YangKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), NMPA Key Laboratory for Research and Evaluation of Radiopharmaceuticals (National Medical Products Administration), Department of Nuclear Medicine; Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Peking University Cancer Hospital · CNPeking University · CNMinistry of Education · ET

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aims to determine the diagnostic performance of whole-body FDG PET/CT plus delayed abdomen PET/MR imaging in the pretherapeutic assessment of pancreatic cancer in comparison with that of contrast-enhanced (CE)-CT/MR imaging. MATERIALS AND

methodsForty patients with pancreatic cancer underwent nonenhanced whole-body FDG PET/CT, delayed abdomen PET/MR imaging, and CE-CT/MR imaging. Two nuclear medicine physicians independently reviewed these images and discussed to reach a consensus, determining tumor resectability according to a 5-point scale, N stage (N0 or N positive), and M stage (M0 or M1). With use of clinical-surgical-pathologic findings as the reference standard, diagnostic performances of the two imaging sets were compared by using the McNemar test.

resultsThe diagnostic performance of FDG PET/CT plus delayed PET/MR imaging was not significantly different from that of CE-CT/MR imaging in the assessment of tumor resectability [area under the receiver operating characteristic curve: 0.927 vs. 0.925 (

conclusionsAlthough FDG PET/CT plus delayed PET/MR imaging showed a diagnostic performance similar to that of CE-CT/MR imaging in the pretherapeutic assessment of the resectability and staging of pancreatic tumors, it still has potential as the more efficient and reasonable work-up approach for the additional value of metastatic information provided by delayed PET/MR imaging.

Indexed as

contrast-enhanced CT/MRFDGpancreatic cancerPET/CTPET/MR

Identifiers

PMID35096590
PMCPMC8794800
OpenAlexW4206584926

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.