ReviewEuropean radiology2026
Restaging the primary tumor in localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma after systemic therapy: a scoping review of the role of CT, FDG-PET, and CA19-9.
Review in European radiology, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe introduction of improved multi-agent systemic therapies has made restaging and treatment response assessment in patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) increasingly complex. This scoping review aims to assess and compare methods for local disease restaging and treatment response assessment in localized PDAC, with a focus on their association with resectability, overall survival (OS), and R0-resection rates. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis scoping review included studies on restaging in patients with PDAC following systemic therapy using CT and PET/CT from MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL.
resultsAmong 4680 identified studies, 20 fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Most (n = 15) studies analyzed CT, and 5 analyzed PET/CT. Groups of restaging methods included new response categories, size-based metrics, volume, vascular contact, tumor attenuation, fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (
conclusionRestaging of localized PDAC after systemic treatment remains challenging due to the limited accuracy of RECIST 1.1, particularly for the classifications partial response and stable disease. The current evidence suggests that integrating additional imaging features, alternative imaging modalities, and the biomarker carbohydrate antigen (CA)19-9 may improve the assessment of resectability and prognosis. These findings support a future version of RECIST 1.1 to alert clinicians to this issue. KEY POINTS: Question How effective are current (PET/)CT-based restaging methods in assessing local disease resectability and prognosis in localized PDAC after modern multi-agent systemic therapy? Findings Current restaging methods show inconsistent association with R0-resection and survival; RECIST 1.1 is particularly limited for the assessment of partial response and stable disease. Clinical relevance Current evidence confirms a need to integrate additional imaging features and the biomarker CA19-9, during restaging in patients with localized pancreatic cancer after modern systemic therapy to improve accuracy and reduce the risk of missed treatment options.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42867514What 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.