ReviewEJNMMI reports2025
Molecular imaging in the diagnostic process of neuroendocrine tumors: a systematic review on unknown primary origin and suspected NETs.
Review in EJNMMI reports, 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.
- Automatic computation of breast cancer biomarkers from multiple [Formula: see text] F-FDG PET image segmentation.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Impact of CT Intensity and Contrast Variability on Deep-Learning-Based Lung-Nodule Detection: A Systematic Review of Preprocessing and Harmonization Strategies (2020-2025).Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The Rise of Total-Body PET/CT: Advancing Molecular Imaging Toward Early Cancer Detection and Potential Future Application in Prevention Healthcare.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNeuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are a heterogeneous group of neoplasms often arising in the gastrointestinal tract, pancreas, and lungs. Diagnosing NETs can be challenging due to their small size, slow growth, and low metabolic activity, especially in cases of unknown primary origin (CUP-NETs). Timely identification of the primary lesion is critical for tailored treatment planning, including peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT), surgery, or somatostatin analogue administration.
objectiveThis systematic review evaluates the diagnostic performance and clinical impact of molecular imaging-especially PET/CT with radiolabeled somatostatin analogs-in patients with suspected NETs or CUP-NETs.
methodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed and Scopus. Data on study design, tracers used, detection rates, and impact on patient management were extracted. Quality assessment was performed using CASP tools.
resultsPET/CT using [68 Ga]Ga-DOTA-peptides (DOTATATE, DOTATOC, DOTANOC) consistently outperformed conventional SPECT imaging with [111In]Pentetreotide (Octreoscan), achieving primary tumor detection rates of 38%-83% versus < 10% with SPECT. In suspected NETs, PET/CT demonstrated high sensitivity (up to 95%) and specificity ( > 85%), with changes in clinical management reported in up to 33% of cases. Dual-tracer imaging ([68 Ga]Ga-DOTATATE and [18F]FDG) and newer tracers such as [18F]DOPA and [18F]AlF-NOTA-octreotide ([18F]-OC) provided added diagnostic value, particularly in aggressive or rare subtypes (e.g. paragangliomas, insulinomas). Detection of unknown primaries commonly led to curative surgical options or more targeted therapies.
conclusionsMolecular imaging-particularly [
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.