ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2026
Clinical performance of [
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess the clinical performance of [
methodsThis retrospective single-centre study included 103 consecutive patients with prostate cancer who underwent clinically indicated [
resultsOverall, PET was positive in 91/103 patients (88.3%), negative in 8/103 (7.8%), and indeterminate in 4/103 (3.9%). Positivity was observed in all patients scanned for primary staging (42/42, 100.0%) and in 49/61 patients (80.3%) referred for recurrence. The most frequent positive sites were primary lesion (57.3%), lymph nodes (35.0%), and bone (24.3%). In recurrence, PSA was significantly higher in PET-positive than in non-positive cases (median 2.40 vs. 0.42 ng/mL, p < 0.001). Log-transformed PSA was significantly associated with PET positivity (OR 7.40, 95% CI 2.18-25.11; p = 0.001), with an AUC of 0.912 (95% CI 0.828-0.974). PSA also correlated with the number of positive sites (rho = 0.620, p < 0.001).
conclusion[
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.