Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36313720›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022

Ur Metser, Roshini Kulanthaivelu, Tanya Chawla, Sarah Johnson, Lisa Avery, Douglas Hussey, Patrick Veit-Haibach, Marcus Bernardini, Liat Hogen

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03811899 (18F-DCFPyL PET/CT in High-grade Epithelial Ovarian Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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.

NCT03811899 nacompletednot on this map

18F-DCFPyL PET/CT in High-grade Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Health Network, TorontoRan2019 to 2022Enrolled20ConditionsStage III Ovarian Cancer, Stage IV Ovarian CancerArms18F-DCFPyL
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

9 authors.

Ur MetserJoint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, Sinai Health Systems, Women's College Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Roshini KulanthaiveluJoint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, Sinai Health Systems, Women's College Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Tanya ChawlaJoint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, Sinai Health Systems, Women's College Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Sarah JohnsonJoint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, Sinai Health Systems, Women's College Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Lisa AveryDepartment of Biostatistics, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Douglas HusseyJoint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, Sinai Health Systems, Women's College Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Patrick Veit-HaibachJoint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, Sinai Health Systems, Women's College Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Marcus BernardiniDivision of Gynecologic Oncology, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Liat HogenDivision of Gynecologic Oncology, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Glutamate carboxypeptidase-II (GCP-II), a zinc metalloenzyme that resides in cell membrane, has been reported as overexpressed in the neovasculature of ovarian cancers. The study objective was to determine whether GCP-II targeted imaging with Materials and methods: Twenty treatment-naïve women with advanced HGSOC were recruited (median age 60 years). Prior to commencing therapy (primary cytoreductive surgery [n=9] or neoadjuvant chemotherapy [n=11]), subjects underwent routine staging with contrast-enhanced abdominopelvic CT (=CT), followed by Results: Of the 25 sites assessed in 20 patients, CT detected disease in 292/500 (58.4%) locations and PET detected disease in 171/500 (34.2%). Compared to CT the sensitivity (95% CI) of PET to detect disease in the upper abdomen, the gastrointestinal tract or the peritoneum was 0.29 (0.20,0.40), 0.21 (0.11,0.33) and 0.74 (0.64,0.82), respectively. In the surgical cohort, 220 sites in 9 patients were evaluated. The sensitivity and specificity of CT and PET were 0.85 versus 0.54 (p<0.001) and 0.73 versus 0.93 (p<0.001), respectively. Conclusion: Although Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03811899.

Indexed as

18F-DCFPyLCTdiagnostic performanceovarian cancerPET/CTPSMA

Identifiers

PMID36313720
PMCPMC9606351

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.