Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39058489›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2024

ER-Targeted PET for Initial Staging and Suspected Recurrence in ER-Positive Breast Cancer.

Gary A Ulaner, Mel Silverstein, Chaitali Nangia, Merry Tetef, Louis Vandermolen, Colleen Coleman, Sadia Khan, Heather MacDonald, Trushar Patel, Tust Techasith and 1 more

Erratum issuedAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase II
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Design and Preclinical Evaluation of FirstJournal of medicinal chemistry · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Radiology · 2025
    Article
  8. Error in FES Dose in Methods.JAMA network open · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Gary A UlanerMolecular Imaging and Therapy, Hoag Family Cancer Institute, Irvine, California.
Mel SilversteinSurgery, Hoag Family Cancer Institute, Newport Beach, California.
Chaitali NangiaMedicine, Hoag Family Cancer Institute, Newport Beach, California.
Merry TetefDepartment of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles.
Louis VandermolenDepartment of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Colleen ColemanSurgery, Hoag Family Cancer Institute, Newport Beach, California.
Sadia KhanSurgery, Hoag Family Cancer Institute, Newport Beach, California.
Heather MacDonaldSurgery, Hoag Family Cancer Institute, Newport Beach, California.
Trushar PatelRadiology, Hoag Family Cancer Institute, Newport Beach, California.
Tust TechasithRadiology, Hoag Family Cancer Institute, Newport Beach, California.
Audrey MauguenDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI SELWYN M VICKERS · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: There are insufficient data comparing 16α-18F-fluoro-17β-estradiol (FES) positron emission tomography (PET) computed tomography (CT) with standard-of-care imaging (SOC) for staging locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) or evaluating suspected recurrence. Objective: To determine the detection rate of FES PET/CT and SOC for distant metastases in patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive LABC and recurrences in patients with ER-positive BC and suspected recurrence. Design, Setting, and Participants: This diagnostic study was conducted as a single-center phase 2 trial, from January 2021 to September 2023. The study design provided 80% power to find a 20% detection rate difference. Participants included patients with ER-positive LABC (cohort 1) or suspected recurrence (cohort 2). Data were analyzed from September 2023 to February 2024. Exposure: Participants underwent both SOC imaging and experimental FES PET/CT. When there were suspicious lesions on imaging, 1 was biopsied for histopathological reference standard to confirm presence (true positive) or absence (false positive) of malignant neoplasm. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcome of interest was the detection rate of FES PET CT vs SOC for distant metastases and recurrences. Results: A total of 124 patients were accrued, with 62 in cohort 1 (median [IQR] age, 52 [32-84] years) and 62 in cohort 2 (median [IQR] age, 66 [30-93] years). In cohort 1, of 14 true-positive findings, SOC imaging detected 12 and FES detected 11 (P > .99). In cohort 2, of 23 true-positive findings, SOC detected 16 and FES detected 18 (P = .77). In 30 patients with lobular histology, of 11 true-positive findings, SOC detected 5 and FES detected 9 (P = .29). There were 6 false-positive findings on SOC and 1 false-positive finding on FES PET/CT (P = .13). Conclusions and Relevance: In this diagnostic study with pathological findings as the reference standard, no difference was found between FES PET/CT and current SOC imaging for detecting distant metastases in patients with ER-positive LABC or recurrences in patients with ER-positive tumors and suspected recurrence. FES PET/CT could be considered for both clinical indications, which are not part of current Appropriate Use Criteria for FES PET. The findings regarding FES PET/CT in patients with lobular tumors, and for lower false positives than current SOC imaging, warrant further investigation.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm StagingPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyAdultAgedCarcinoma, LobularEstradiolFemaleHumansMiddle AgedReceptors, Estrogen16-fluoroestradiolEstradiolReceptors, Estrogen

Identifiers

PMID39058489
PMCPMC11282447

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.