Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42414675›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2026

Antonino Andrea Blandino, Elio Quiros, Luigi Asmundo, M Lisa Zhang, Mario V Russo, Amirkasra Mojtahed, Mark A Anderson, Pedram Heidari, Onofrio Antonio Catalano

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Antonino Andrea BlandinoDepartment of Radiology, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0004-6017-5467
Elio QuirosDepartment of Radiology, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-4656-1317
Luigi AsmundoDepartment of Radiology, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1410-341X
M Lisa ZhangDepartment of Pathology, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8029-4787
Mario V RussoDepartment of Radiology, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Amirkasra MojtahedDepartment of Radiology, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Mark A AndersonDepartment of Radiology, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Pedram HeidariDivision of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Onofrio Antonio CatalanoDepartment of Radiology, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. onofriocatalano@yahoo.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7733-4138

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the value of hybrid

methodsThis retrospective study included patients with pathologically confirmed IPNB who underwent

resultsEight patients (5 M, 3 F; median age: 65.5) with 10 lesions were included: five IPNBs with associated invasive adenocarcinoma, four dysplastic, and one non-dysplastic lesion. SUVmax and lesion-to-liver SUVmax ratio positively correlated with histological grade (ρ = 0.784, p = 0.007 and ρ = 0.844, p = 0.002, respectively). SUVmax ratio was higher in IPNBs with associated invasive adenocarcinoma versus both non-adenocarcinoma (p = 0.016) and dysplastic lesions (p = 0.032). Lesion SUVmax was higher in IPNBs with associated invasive adenocarcinoma only versus non-adenocarcinoma (p = 0.032) without reaching significance against dysplastic lesions (p = 0.063). ROC analysis yielded AUC values of 0.90-0.96 (95% CI 0.674-1.000) for SUV parameters. Cut-offs of 8.04 for SUVmax and 3.00 for SUVmax ratio achieved 80% sensitivity and 100% specificity.

conclusionHybrid KEY POINTS: • Preoperative differentiation between dysplastic and IPNBs with invasive adenocarcinoma remains challenging, yet critical for surgical planning and prognosis. •

Indexed as

Bile Duct NeoplasmsFluorodeoxyglucose F18Magnetic Resonance ImagingMultimodal ImagingPositron-Emission TomographyAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadiopharmaceuticalsRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentFluorodeoxyglucose F18RadiopharmaceuticalsBile duct neoplasmsFluorodeoxyglucose F18Magnetic resonance imagingNeoplasm gradingPapilloma, intraductalPositron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

PMID42414675

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.