ReviewCancers2024
Radiographic Response Assessments and Standardized Imaging Interpretation Criteria in Head and Neck Cancer on FDG PET/CT: A Narrative Review.
Review in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere is growing interest in the development and application of standardized imaging criteria (SIC), to minimize variability and improve the reproducibility of image interpretation in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC).
methods"Squamous cell carcinoma" AND "standardized interpretation criteria" OR "radiographic response assessment" were searched using PubMed and Google Scholar for articles published between 2009 and 2024, returning 56 publications. After abstract review, 18 were selected for further evaluation, and 6 different SICs (i.e., PERCIST, Porceddu, Hopkins, NI-RADS, modified Deauville, and Cuneo) were included in this review. Each SIC is evaluated in the context of 8 desired traits of a standardized reporting system.
resultsTwo SICs have societal endorsements (i.e., PERCIST, NI-RADS); four can be used in the evaluation of locoregional and systemic disease (i.e., PERCIST, Hopkins, NI-RADS, Cuneo), and four have specific categories for equivocal imaging results (i.e., Porceddu, NI-RADS, modified Deauville, and Cuneo). All demonstrated areas for future improvement in the context of the 8 desired traits.
conclusionMultiple SICs have been developed for and demonstrated value in HNSCC post-treatment imaging; however, these systems remain underutilized. Selecting an SIC with features that best match the needs of one's practice is expected to maximize the likelihood of successful implementation.
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.