ArticleCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society2026
Baseline and interim
Article in Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the prognostic value of baseline and interim Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (
methodsA single-center retrospective study included adult patients with HL who underwent baseline and interim
resultsA total of 116 patients were included (81 males, 35 females), with a median age of 35 years and a median follow-up of 44 months (IQR 37-58). ROC analysis first established the individual prognostic performance and optimal cut-off values for PET parameters, with interim MTV and TLG achieving AUCs of 0.891 and 0.896 for OS, respectively (cut-offs: 21.8 cm³ and 94.4 g). Subsequently, multivariable Cox regression identified baseline MTV, interim MTV, and the Deauville score as significant independent predictors of PFS. Finally, based on these independent factors, combined models were evaluated; however, they yielded AUCs of 0.901 (95% CI: 0.857-0.943) for OS and 0.824 (95% CI: 0.745-0.902) for PFS, which showed comparable efficacy and did not significantly surpass the predictive power of individual quantitative metrics. While similar trends for interim MTV and the Deauville score were observed for OS, the analysis was constrained by the small number of death events.
conclusionBaseline and interim
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.