ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2026
Compatibility of different PET/CT criteria in evaluating treatment response and survival in non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with immunotherapy.
Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral PET/CT-based criteria have been developed to assess immunotherapy (IT) response, but their correlation with overall survival (OS) and mutual concordance in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains unclear.
methodsPre-treatment and first post-treatment 18F-FDG PET/CT scans of 35 metastatic NSCLC patients receiving second-line or later IT were analyzed using four criteria: PERCIST, PECRIT, PERCIMT, and imPERCIST5. According to each criterion, treatment response was classified as complete metabolic response (CMR), partial metabolic response (PMR), stable metabolic disease (SMD), or progressive metabolic disease (PMD). The primary endpoint was the association with OS, and the secondary was inter-criteria concordance. Patients were stratified by objective response rate (responders: CMR + PMR vs. non-responders: SMD + PMD) and disease control rate (disease control: CMR + PMR + SMD vs. no disease control: PMD).
resultsThe mean age was 65 ± 6 years, with 94.3% male patients. Three received pembrolizumab and 32 nivolumab. Median OS after immunotherapy was 12 months (95% CI 8.9-15.1). Responders showed significantly better OS across all four PET/CT criteria. Disease control by PERCIST (HR 0.27, 95% CI 0.10-0.70, p = 0.007) and PERCIMT (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.16-0.88, p = 0.023) was significantly associated with improved OS, unlike PECRIT and imPERCIST5. Overall concordance among the criteria was good (Fleiss' kappa: 0.70). Concordance was excellent for ORR evaluation (kappa: 0.92), but lower for DCR (kappa: 0.62).
conclusionIn this retrospective exploratory study, PERCIST and PERCIMT demonstrated a stronger association with OS compared with PECRIT and imPERCIST5 when disease control was considered. While agreement across criteria was high for objective response assessment, concordance for disease control was lower.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41637001What 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.