ArticleEuropean radiology2023
Detection efficacy of analog [
Article in European radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dual-layer spectral detector computed tomography multiparameter machine learning model for prediction of invasive lung adenocarcinoma.Translational lung cancer research · 2025Article
- Total-body dynamic PET/CT imaging reveals kinetic distribution of [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Article
- Extending the clinical capabilities of short- and long-lived positron-emitting radionuclides through high sensitivity PET/CT.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2022Review
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
objectivesThis prospective study compared the detection efficacy of analog
methodsEighty-seven patients with lung adenocarcinoma featuring GGNs who underwent dF and dN PET/CT were enrolled. Based on the GGN component, diameter, and solid-part size, 87 corresponding patients examined using aF PET/CT were included, with age, sex, and lesion characteristics closely matched. Images were visually evaluated, and the tumor to background ratio (TBR) was used for semi-quantitative analysis.
resultsUltimately, 40 and 47 patients with pure GGNs (pGGNs) and mixed GGNs (mGGNs), respectively, were included. dF PET/CT revealed more positive lesions and higher tracer uptake in GGNs than did aF PET/CT (53/87 vs. 26/87, p < 0.05; TBR: 3.08 ± 4.85 vs. 1.42 ± 0.93, p < 0.05), especially in mGGNs (44/47 vs. 26/47, p < 0.05; TBR: 4.48 ± 6.17 vs. 1.78 ± 1.16, p < 0.05). However, dN PET/CT detected more positive lesions than did dF PET/CT (71/87 vs. 53/87, p < 0.05), especially in pGGNs (24/40 vs. 9/40, p < 0.05).
conclusionsdF PET/CT provides superior detection efficacy over aF PET/CT for patients with lung adenocarcinoma featuring GGNs, particularly mGGNs. dN PET/CT revealed superior detection efficacy over dF PET/CT, particularly in pGGNs. aF, dF, and dN PET/CT are valuable non-invasive examinations for lung cancer featuring GGNs, with dN PET/CT offering the best detection performance. KEY POINTS: • Digital PET/CT provides superior detection efficacy over analog PET/CT in patients with lung adenocarcinoma featuring GGNs. • dN PET/CT can offer more help in the early detection of malignant GGN.
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.