ReviewLife (Basel, Switzerland)2023
PET Criteria by Cancer Type from Imaging Interpretation to Treatment Response Assessment: Beyond FDG PET Score.
Review in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Addressing unmet needs in nuclear medicine: Italian experience with PET/CT features and structured reporting in oncology.La Radiologia medica · 2026Article
- Role of CXCR4 PET Imaging for the Evaluation of Gliomas: A Comprehensive Literature Review.Cancers · 2026Review
- Role of [18F]FMISO PET Imaging for the Evaluation of Gliomas: A Comprehensive Literature Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Normal organ [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- The Role of [18F]FDG PET Imaging for the Assessment of Pulmonary Lymphangitic Carcinomatosis: A Comprehensive Narrative Literature Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- The Role of 11C-Methionine PET Imaging for the Evaluation of Lymphomas: A Systematic Review.Hematology reports · 2024Review
- Review
- Emerging Role of [Hematology reports · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundin recent years, the role of positron emission tomography (PET) and PET/computed tomography (PET/CT) has emerged as a reliable diagnostic tool in a wide variety of pathological conditions. This review aims to collect and review PET criteria developed for interpretation and treatment response assessment in cases of non-[
methodsA wide literature search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus and Google Scholar databases was made to find relevant published articles about non-[
resultsThe comprehensive computer literature search revealed 183 articles. On reviewing the titles and abstracts, 149 articles were excluded because the reported data were not within the field of interest. Finally, 34 articles were selected and retrieved in full-text versions.
conclusionsavailable criteria are a promising tool for the interpretation of non-FDG PET scans, but also to assess the response to therapy and therefore to predict the prognosis. However, oriented clinical trials are needed to clearly evaluate their impact on patient management.
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.