ArticleAnnals of nuclear medicine2026
Utility of preoperative [¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT for CT-guided biopsy planning of large tumors: target adjustment and malignant yield with hotspot targeting.
Article in Annals of nuclear medicine, 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
objectiveTo assess the clinical utility of preoperative [¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT for CT-guided biopsy planning of large tumors, including predictors of PET/CT-informed target adjustment and malignant yield with FDG hotspot targeting in very large tumors.
methodsIn this retrospective single-center study (January 2015-December 2025), we analyzed 82 patients who underwent pre-biopsy [¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT at our institution within 90 days. Target adjustment was retrospectively adjudicated as the presence of a spatial difference between the contrast-enhanced CT-based target and the PET/CT-informed target selected after considering intratumoral FDG uptake. ROC analysis was used to evaluate whether tumor size predicted target adjustment and to determine the optimal cutoff. Multivariable logistic regression included age, sex, tumor size, PET system (analog vs. digital), ΔSUV, lesion location (chest vs. other), and lymphoma (vs. other). In tumors ≥ 52 mm, malignant yield was compared between hotspot (highest uptake) and non-hotspot targeting.
resultsTarget adjustment was performed in 28/82 cases (34.1%). Interobserver agreement was 89% with Cohen's κ = 0.74 (95% CI, 0.58-0.89). Tumor size predicted target adjustment (AUC 0.847; 95% CI 0.761-0.934), and the Youden-optimal cutoff was 52 mm (sensitivity 0.82, specificity 0.81). Target adjustment rates were 5/49 (10.2%) for < 52 mm and 23/33 (69.7%) for ≥ 52 mm (p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, tumor size (per 10 mm) was independently associated with target adjustment (OR 2.33; 95% CI 1.56-3.50; p < 0.001), while female sex was inversely associated (OR 0.20; 95% CI 0.04-0.96; p = 0.045). Lymphoma showed a trend toward an inverse association that did not reach statistical significance (OR 0.11; 95% CI 0.01-1.11; p = 0.062). The multivariable model showed good discrimination (AUC 0.90; 95% CI 0.82-0.98; DeLong). Among tumors ≥ 52 mm, malignant pathology was obtained in 14/14 cases (100%) with hotspot targeting versus 5/9 (55.6%) with non-hotspot targeting (p = 0.014).
conclusionsPreoperative [¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT supports CT-guided biopsy planning of large tumors by identifying cases likely to require target adjustment and was associated with higher malignant yield when the FDG hotspot was targeted in tumors ≥ 52 mm.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42223871What 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.