| Title |
Diagnostic performance of 11C-choline PET/CT and FDG PET/CT for staging and restaging of renal cell cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Nuclear Medicine, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12149-018-1287-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yukako Nakanishi, Kazuhiro Kitajima, Yusuke Yamada, Takahiko Hashimoto, Toru Suzuki, Shuken Go, Akihiro Kanematsu, Michio Nojima, Koichiro Yamakado, Shingo Yamamoto |
| Abstract |
To compare findings obtained with 11C-choline and FDG PET/CT scanning for renal cell carcinoma staging and restaging. Twenty-eight renal cell carcinoma patients whose histological subtype was clear cell type in 26 and papillary type in 2, while Fuhrman nuclear grade was G1,2 in 16 and G3,4 in 12, underwent both 11C-choline and FDG PET/CT examinations before (n = 10) and/or after (n = 18) treatment, then those scanning modalities were compared in regard to patient- and lesion-based diagnostic performance using 5 grading scores. Final diagnosis in each case was obtained based on histopathology, conventional radiological imaging, and clinical follow-up findings. The differences between 11C-choline and FDG PET/CT findings were evaluated using receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) analysis and a McNemar test. Patient-based sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive, negative predictive, accuracy, and area under the ROC curve (AUC) values for 11C-choline PET/CT for staging and restaging were 88.0% (22/25), 66.7% (2/3), 95.7% (22/23), 40.0% (2/5), 85.7% (24/28), and 0.887, respectively, while those for FDG-PET/CT were 56.0% (14/25), 66.7% (2/3), 93.3% (14/15), 15.4% (2/13), 57.1% (16/28), and 0.647, respectively. Sensitivity, accuracy, and AUC were significantly different (p = 0.013, p = 0.013, p = 0.012, respectively). Among the 120 lesions, those with kidney, lung, lymph node, bone, pancreas, venous tumor thrombosis, adrenal gland, liver, or skin localization numbered 15, 64, 16, 13, 4, 3, 2, 2, and 1, respectively. For all 120 lesions, 75 (62.5%) and 47 (39.2%) were detected by 11C-choline and FDG PET/CT, respectively (p < 0.0001). For staging and restaging of renal cell carcinoma patients, 11C-choline-PET/CT is significantly more useful than FDG-PET/CT. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 25% |
| Mexico | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 18 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 17% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 11% |
| Professor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 4 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 50% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 6% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 6% |
| Psychology | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 22 August 2018.
All research outputs
#12,910,848
of 23,100,534 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Nuclear Medicine
#244
of 637 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,272
of 333,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Nuclear Medicine
#6
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,100,534 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 637 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 333,251 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.