Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38188464›Full record

ArticleTherapeutic advances in medical oncology2024

Nomogram to predict the presence of PSMA-negative but FDG-positive lesion in castration-resistant prostate cancer: a multicenter cohort study.

Jian Pan, Tingwei Zhang, Shouzhen Chen, Ting Bu, Jinou Zhao, Xudong Ni, Benkang Shi, Hualei Gan, Yu Wei, Qifeng Wang and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutic advances in medical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jian PanDepartment of Urology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.
Tingwei ZhangDepartment of Urology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.
Shouzhen ChenDepartment of Urology, Qilu Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Shandong Province, China.
Ting BuDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Jinou ZhaoDepartment of Urology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.
Xudong NiDepartment of Urology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.
Benkang ShiDepartment of Urology, Qilu Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Shandong Province, China.
Hualei GanDepartment of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Yu WeiDepartment of Urology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.
Qifeng WangDepartment of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Beihe WangDepartment of Urology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.
Junlong WuDepartment of Urology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.
Shaoli SongDepartment of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Feng WangDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Chang LiuDepartment of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Dingwei YeDepartment of Urology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.
Yao ZhuDepartment of Urology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7950-6669
Shanghai Medical College of Fudan University · CNQilu Hospital of Shandong University · CNNanjing Jiangning Hospital · CNNanjing Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: PSMA-negative but FDG-positive (PSMA-/FDG+) lesion in dual-tracer ( Methods: A cohort of 298 patients who underwent dual-tracer PET/CT with a less than 5-day interval was included. The evaluation of the prognostic performance of the radiomics model drew upon the survival data derived from 40 patients with CRPC treated with Results: PSMA-/FDG+ lesions were identified in 56 (18.8%) CRPC patients. Both radiomics (area under the curve [AUC], 0.83) and clinical models (AUC, 0.78) demonstrated robust performance in PSMA-/FDG+ lesion prediction. Decision curve analysis revealed that the radiomics model yielded a net benefit over the 'screen all' strategy at a threshold probability of ⩾4%. At a 5% probability threshold, the radiomics model facilitated a 21% reduction in Conclusion: This study successfully developed two models with accurate estimations of the risk associated with PSMA-/FDG+ lesions in CRPC patients. These models held potential utility in aiding the selection of candidates for

Indexed as

CRPCFDGnomogramPSMA

Identifiers

PMID38188464
PMCPMC10771757
OpenAlexW4390639852

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.