ArticleJournal of imaging2023
2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT in Cancer of Unknown Primary Tumor-A Retrospective Register-Based Cohort Study.
Article in Journal of imaging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Imaging of cancer of unknown primary: a systematic literature review of the past, present, and future.The British journal of radiology · 2025Pooled it
- Identifying the primary tumour in patients with cancer of unknown primary (CUP) using [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Pooled it
- Utility ofClinical Medicine Insights. Oncology · 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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated the impact of 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT on detection rate (DR) of the primary tumor and survival in patients with suspected cancer of unknown primary tumor (CUP), comparing it to the conventional diagnostic imaging method, CT. Patients who received a tentative CUP diagnosis at Odense University Hospital from 2014-2017 were included. Patients receiving a 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT were assigned to the 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT group and patients receiving a CT only to the CT group. DR was calculated as the proportion of true positive findings of 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT and CT scans, separately, using biopsy of the primary tumor, autopsy, or clinical decision as reference standard. Survival analyses included Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional hazards regression adjusted for age, sex, treatment, and propensity score. We included 193 patients. Of these, 159 were in the 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT group and 34 were in the CT group. DR was 36.5% in the 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT group and 17.6% in the CT group, respectively (
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.