ArticleEJNMMI research2025
Predicting pathological response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a comparative study of
Article in EJNMMI research, 2025. 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to compare the utility of 3’-deoxy-3’-¹⁸F-fluorothymidine (FLT) positron emission tomography (PET) and 2-deoxy-2-¹⁸F-fluoro-D-glucose (FDG) PET in predicting pathological response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), and retrospectively evaluated 21 patients who underwent FLT and FDG PET before and after nCRT. The maximum standardised uptake value (SUVmax) of the primary tumour was measured pre- and post-nCRT, and the percentage reduction in SUVmax (%ΔSUVmax) was calculated. Pathological response was assessed using the Evans grading system, with Grades I–IIa defined as non-responders and Grades IIb–IV as responders. Mann-Whitney U tests and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were performed.
resultsThree patients with blood glucose levels ≥ 200 mg/dL at pre-nCRT FDG PET were excluded from FDG PET analysis. Surgical specimens classified nine patients as responders and 12 as non-responders. SUVmax_pre-nCRT did not differ significantly between groups for either modality. SUVmax_post-nCRT was significantly lower in responders for both FLT (P = 0.001) and FDG (P = 0.009) PET. A significant %ΔSUVmax difference was observed only with FLT PET (P = 0.002). Areas under the curve for predicting response to nCRT were: FLT SUVmax_post-nCRT (0.90), FLT %ΔSUVmax (0.89), and FDG SUVmax_post-nCRT (0.86).
conclusionFLT PET demonstrated comparable performance to FDG PET in assessing response to nCRT in resectable and borderline resectable PDAC, with potential as a complementary or alternative imaging modality in neoadjuvant settings given its independence from glycaemic status and biological proliferation specificity.
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.