ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2023
External validation of an
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 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.
- Do MRI radiomic models truly generalize? External validation of three studies in parotid lesion characterization.European radiology · 2026Article
- Review
- Selection Criteria for De-Escalated Chemoradiotherapy for HPV-Related Oropharyngeal Cancer Based on Prognostic Biomarkers or Early Tumor Response to Therapy: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
PURPOSE/
objectiveThe purpose of the study is to externally validate published MATERIAL/
methodsOutcome data and pre-radiotherapy PET images of 100 oropharyngeal cancer patients (stage IV:78) treated with concomitant chemotherapy to 66-69 Gy/30 fr were available. Tumors were segmented using a previously validated semi-automatic method; 450 radiomic features (RF) were extracted according to IBSI (Image Biomarker Standardization Initiative) guidelines. Only one model for cancer-specific survival (CSS) prediction was suitable to be independently tested, according to our criteria. This model, in addition to HPV status, SUVmean and SUVmax, included two independent meta-factors (F
resultsRegarding the analysis of the subgroup with HPV information, with a median follow-up of 41.6 months, seven patients died due to cancer. R was confirmed to be associated to CSS (p value = 0.05) with a C-index equal 0.75 (95% CI=0.62-0.85). The best cut-off value (equal to 0.15) showed high ability in patient stratification (p=0.01, HR=7.4, 95% CI=1.6-11.4). The 5-year CSS for R were 97% (95% CI: 93-100%) vs 74% (56-92%) for low- and high-risk groups, respectively. R
conclusionA previously published PET radiomic model for CSS prediction was independently validated. Performances of the model were similar to the ones of using only the MTV, without improvement of prediction accuracy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36604325What 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.