ArticleAnnals of nuclear medicine2024
Simultaneous evaluation of brain metastasis and thoracic cancer using semiconductor
Article in Annals of nuclear medicine, 2024. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Recent advances in theranostics and oncology PET: emerging radionuclides and targets.Annals of nuclear medicine · 2025Review
- Diagnostic Ability and Correlation of DigitalNuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the potential of whole-body digital
methodsA total of 45 lung or breast cancer patients suspected of LR after SRS were investigated using brain and whole-body MET-PET/CT scans. We compared the tumor-to-normal ratio (TNR) and maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) between patients with LR and radiation necrosis (RN) and performed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses. We also investigated associations among extracranial recurrence, intracranial recurrence, primary site, and initial treatment type.
resultsA total of 44 LR and 14 RN lesions were analyzed. In the ROC analyses for differentiating LR from RN, TNR showed higher area under the curve (AUC) (0.82) than SUVmax (0.79), and the cutoff TNR value (2.12) was higher than current cutoff values of conventional PET systems. The whole-body scans detected extracranial recurrences in 31.1% of the patients. Recurrence rates were not significantly correlated with existence of intracranial recurrence or primary site, but patients who underwent non-surgical treatment (consisting of stage III/ IV patients according to the Union for International Cancer Control TNM classification or small-cell lung cancer patients) showed significantly higher recurrence than the surgically treated patients (68.8% vs. 10.3%, p = 0.0001).
conclusionIn digital MET-PET/CT imaging, TNR was a more useful parameter to differentiate LR from RN than SUVmax, and the cutoff value was higher than those with conventional PET systems. Additional whole-body scans could detect extracranial recurrence and would be especially useful for advanced thoracic cancer patients who underwent non-surgical treatment.
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.