ArticleF1000Research2026
Diagnostic Accuracy of PET Imaging for Lymph Node Detection in Breast cancer patients undergoing Upfront Surgery: A Single-Institution Analysis of Breast Cancer Patients.
Article in F1000Research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The role of PET imaging in lymph node staging for breast cancer patients proceeding to upfront surgery remains incompletely characterized. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of PET imaging in immediate surgical patients. Methods: A retrospective cohort of 70 breast cancer patients undergoing upfront surgery was analyzed. PET imaging findings were compared with histopathological examination (HPE) results. Diagnostic accuracy metrics including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and likelihood ratios were calculated. Results: Among 70 surgical patients (mean age 53.9 ± 11.5 years), 26 (37.14%) had pathologically confirmed lymph node involvement. PET imaging demonstrated sensitivity of 69.23% (95% CI: 48.27-85.67), specificity of 81.82% (95% CI: 67.27-91.60), PPV of 69.23%, and NPV of 81.82%. The test correctly identified 18 of 26 patients with nodal disease while avoiding false positives in 36 of 44 node-negative patients. Positive likelihood ratio was 3.81, and negative likelihood ratio was 0.38. The F1-score was 0.6923, indicating good balance between precision and sensitivity for surgical planning. Conclusions: PET imaging demonstrated moderate sensitivity (69.23%) for detecting lymph node involvement in patients undergoing upfront surgery. Its relatively high negative predictive value (81.82%) suggests a potential role in identifying patients at lower risk of nodal disease; however, negative PET findings should be interpreted in conjunction with clinical, radiological, and pathological assessment. PET may contribute to preoperative staging and surgical planning, while positive findings may require confirmatory evaluation when management decisions depend on nodal status.
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.