ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2025
Exploration the feasibility and additional value of [
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Same-day dual-tracer PET/CT imaging with [Annals of nuclear medicine · 2025Trial
- Exploration of the Feasibility of One-Day Dual-Low-ActivityMolecular imaging and biology · 2026Article
- Recent advances in theranostics and oncology PET: emerging radionuclides and targets.Annals of nuclear medicine · 2025Review
- Beyond skin deep: total-body positron emission tomography to illuminate systemic inflammation in psoriatic arthritis.Current opinion in immunology · 2025Review
- Commentary: Targeting fibroblast activation protein in rheumatoid arthritis: from molecular imaging to precision therapeutics.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Comparative Study on Effective Dose and Cancer Risk in Dual-tracer Hybrid Imaging - International Commission on Radiological Protection and Personalized Models.Journal of medical physicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo validate the feasibility of one-stop 2-[
methodsThirty pairs of patients with suspected malignancies who underwent dual-tracer imaging were enrolled in this retrospective study. The images were reconstructed at 34-39 and 50-60 min after additional injection of [
resultsComparing FAPI-weighted PET (PET
conclusionOne-stop FDG-FAPI PET/CT at 34 min could provide sufficient information to meet clinical diagnosis and showed better lesion detectability than that in the 2-day protocol.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39320482What 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.