ArticleBrain & spine2025
Assessing the role of FET-PET imaging in glioblastoma recurrence: A retrospective analysis of diagnostic accuracy.
Article in Brain & spine, 2025. 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.
- The evolution of chemotherapy in brain tumors: from historical milestones to precision medicine in glioblastoma.Exploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy · 2026Review
- Advances in Artificial Intelligence for Glioblastoma Radiotherapy Planning and Treatment.Cancers · 2025Review
- Detection of early alterations in radiologically normal-appearing brain regions before recurrence of high-grade glioma using multiparameter mapping and diffusion tensor imaging.Neuro-oncology advancesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most aggressive primary brain tumor in adults, with a high recurrence rate. Differentiating tumor progression from treatment-induced changes remains a diagnostic challenge. Research question: Can FET-PET reliably distinguish true GBM recurrence from post-therapeutic effects across multiple recurrence stages, and how does MGMT promoter methylation influence diagnostic accuracy? Material and methods: We performed a retrospective, single-center study correlating PET findings with histopathological results from surgery or biopsy at first, second, and third recurrence. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated using three interpretive scenarios for uncertain PET results. Subgroup analysis based on MGMT methylation was also performed. Results: 960 patients with GBM were treated at our department between 2006 and 2021, of whom 347 (36.1 %) had one tumor recurrence during follow-up with 156 (45.0 %) FET-PET scans available. 95 patients (9.9 %) had a second recurrence with a FET-PET conducted in 37 of these (39.0 %), whereas 23 patients (2.4 %) had a third recurrence with a FET-PET available in 8 patients (34.8 %). Sensitivity was 95 % at first recurrence, 96 % at second, and 83 % at third. Specificity was low overall (13 %, 0 %, 0 %). No statistically robust differences in diagnostic performance were observed between MGMT subgroups (p > 0.4 for all). Discussion and conclusion: PET imaging demonstrated high sensitivity for detecting GBM recurrence but showed variable specificity. Notably, sensitivity declined with an increasing number of recurrences, suggesting that cumulative treatment effects and greater tumor heterogeneity over time may affect diagnostic performance. Further prospective studies are needed to refine diagnostic thresholds and improve clinical decision-making.
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.