| Title |
The Role of 18F-FDG PET/CT on Staging and Prognosis in Patients with Small Cell Lung Cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Radiology, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00330-015-4132-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A. Zer, L. Domachevsky, Y. Rapson, M. Nidam, D. Flex, A. M. Allen, S. M. Stemmer, D. Groshar, H. Bernstine |
| Abstract |
We evaluated 18F-FDG PET/CT in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) staging and assessed metabolic (SUVmax, MTV and TLG) and morphologic (CTvol) variables as predictors for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Patients with newly diagnosed, histopathology-confirmed SCLC, who underwent 18F-FDG PET/CT were evaluated. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to determine the association between the primary tumour SUVmax, MTV, TLG and CTvol with OS and PFS. Similar evaluations were performed when hilar/mediastinal lymphadenopathy was included [total SUVmax (TSUVmax), total MTV (TMTV) and total TLG (TTLG)]. 55 patients were included. 18F-FDG PET/CT changed staging in 6/55 (10.9%) patients who were upstaged to extensive disease. TTLG (>443.8) was a significant variable for OS with HR=2.1 (CI 1.14-3.871, p=0.017). Patients with TTLG>443.8 had a median OS of 13.4 months compared to 25.7 months in patients with TTLG<443.8 (p=0.018). TMTV (>72.4) was significant for PFS with HR=2.3 (CI 1.11-4.8, p=0.025). A median PFS of 12.1 and 26.2 months was found with TMTV greater and less than 72.4, respectively (p=0.005). 18F-FDG PET/CT improved staging of patients with SCLC, and TTLG and TMTV can be used as prognostic variables for OS and PFS, respectively. • Identifying variables that predict the prognosis of patients with SCLC is important. • 18F-FDG PET/CT influences staging of patients with SCLC. • Metabolic parameters could be used as predictors for PFS and OS. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Austria | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 31 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 34% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 16% |
| Professor | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 5 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 63% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 6% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 January 2017.
All research outputs
#13,452,391
of 22,836,570 outputs
Outputs from European Radiology
#1,977
of 4,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,197
of 388,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Radiology
#25
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,836,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,122 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 388,246 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 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 54% of its contemporaries.