SynthesisBMC cancer2026
Preoperative PET or PET/CT for malignant diagnosis of Gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC cancer, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are the most prevalent mesenchymal tumors of the gastrointestinal system; however, preoperative imaging for the accurate diagnosis of malignancy is unavailable. We conducted a meta-analysis to comprehensively confirm the value of preoperative Positron emission tomography (PET) in diagnosing the malignant potential of GISTs, aiming to guide preoperative preparation when biopsy is confined and prognostic evaluation for patients with localized primary GISTs after curative resection.
methodsPubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were systematically searched from database inception till June 1, 2025, to retrieve articles reporting the predictive value of preoperative PET or PET/CT for GISTs. Overall sensitivity (SEN) and specificity (SPE) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using forest plots were estimated. The chi-square and I2 tests were used to analyze significant heterogeneity. QUADAS-2 and Deek funnel plots were constructed to assess publication bias risk. Subgroup analyses were performed to investigate the sources of heterogeneity.
resultsFifteen studies including 568 patients with GISTs were included. The findings demonstrated overall SEN (0.86, 95% CI: 0.74–0.93), SPE (0.87, 95% CI: 0.75–0.94), positive likelihood ratio 6.80, 95% CI: 3.09–14.96), negative likelihood ratio (0.16, 95% CI: 0.07–0.34), and the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (0.93, 95% CI: 0.91–0.95). Subgroup analysis indicated that with cut-off values at ≥ 5, the diagnosis could have a higher accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve values were 0.89, 0.92, and 0.96, respectively).
conclusionPreoperative PET or PET/CT exhibited excellent diagnostic performance in predicting malignancy in GISTs and may be employed as an effective non-invasive imaging device for guiding preoperative preparation when biopsy is not possible and prognostic analysis for patients with localized primary GISTs who underwent radical surgery.
trial registrationOur protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024545100) on May 9th, 2024.
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.