| Title |
Comparison of FDG-PET/CT and contrast-enhanced CT for monitoring therapy response in patients with metastatic breast cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00259-017-3703-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christopher C. Riedl, Katja Pinker, Gary A. Ulaner, Leonard T. Ong, Pascal Baltzer, Maxine S. Jochelson, Heather L. McArthur, Mithat Gönen, Maura Dickler, Wolfgang A. Weber |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to compare fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG PET/CT) and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) for the prediction of progression-free survival (PFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) in patients with stage IV breast cancer undergoing systemic therapy. Sixty-five patients with metastatic breast cancer treated with first- or second-line systemic therapy in prospective clinical trials were included. Response to treatment was evaluated by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 for CE-CT and by PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (PERCIST), respectively. All responders by RECIST (n = 22) were also responders by PERCIST, but 40% (17/43) of non-responders by RECIST were responders by PERCIST. Responses according to RECIST and PERCIST both correlated with PFS, but PERCIST showed a significantly higher predictive accuracy (concordance index for PFS: 0.70 vs. 0.60). One-year PFS for responders vs. non-responders by RECIST was 59% vs. 27%, compared to 63% vs. 0% by PERCIST. Four-year DSS of responders and non-responders by RECIST was 50% and 38%, respectively (p = 0.2, concordance index: 0.55) as compared to 58% vs. 18% for PERCIST (p < 0.001, concordance index: 0.65). Response on PET/CT was also a significantly better predictor for DSS than disease control on CE-CT. In patients with metastatic breast cancer, tumor response on PET/CT appears to be a superior predictor of PFS and DSS than response on CE-CT. Monitoring tumor response by PET/CT may increase the power of clinical trials using tumor response as an endpoint, and may improve patient management in clinical routine. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 51 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 9 | 18% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 12% |
| Researcher | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 18% |
| Unknown | 12 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 47% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 4% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 16 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 November 2022.
All research outputs
#2,343,850
of 23,806,312 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
#168
of 3,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,646
of 312,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
#1
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,806,312 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,083 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,240 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.