ArticleCancers2023
Al[
Article in Cancers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Controversies in NEN: An ENETS position statement on the interchangeability of somatostatin receptor PET tracers.Journal of neuroendocrinology · 2026Review
- Comparison of inter- and intraobserver agreement between [EJNMMI reports · 2025Article
- Application of modified Curie and SIOPEN skeleton scoring systems inAnnals of nuclear medicine · 2025Article
- Targeted radionuclide therapy and diagnostic imaging of SSTR positive neuroendocrine tumors: a clinical update in the new decade.Frontiers in nuclear medicine · 2025Review
- Radiation exposure and protection advice after [EJNMMI research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PET imaging of neuroendocrine tumours (NET) is well established for staging and therapy follow-up. The short half-life, increasing costs, and regulatory issues significantly limit the availability of approved imaging agents, such as [68Ga]Ga-DOTA-TATE. Al[18F]F-NOTA-Octreotide provides a similar biodistribution and tumour uptake, can be produced on a large scale and may improve access to precision imaging. Here we prospectively compared the clinical utility of [68Ga]Ga-DOTA-TATE and Al[18F]F-NOTA-Octreotide in the Latin-American population. Our results showed that in patients with stage IV NETs [68Ga]Ga-DOTA-TATE presents higher physiological uptake than Al[18F]F-NOTA-Octreotide in the liver, hypophysis, salivary glands, adrenal glands (all p < 0.001), pancreatic uncinated process, kidneys, and small intestine (all p < 0.05). Nevertheless, despite the lower background uptake of Al[18F]F-NOTA-Octreotide, comparative analysis of tumour-to-liver (TLR) and tumour-to-spleen (TSR) showed no statistically significant difference for lesions in the liver, bone, lymph nodes, and other tissues. Only three discordant lesions in highly-metastases livers were detected by [68Ga]Ga-DOTA-TATE but not by Al[18F]F-NOTA-Octreotide and only one discordant lesion was detected by Al[18F]F-NOTA-Octreotide but not by [68Ga]Ga-DOTA-TATE. Non-inferiority analysis showed that Al[18F]F-NOTA-Octreotide is comparable to [68Ga]Ga-DOTA-TATE. Hence, our results demonstrate that Al[18F]F-NOTA-Octreotide provided excellent image quality, visualized NET lesions with high sensitivity and represents a highly promising, clinical alternative to [68Ga]Ga-DOTA-TATE.
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.