| Title |
Diagnostic accuracy of FDG PET/CT for clinical evaluation at the end of treatment of HL and NHL: a comparison of the Deauville Criteria (DC) and the International Harmonization Project Criteria (IHPC)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00259-016-3390-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Federico Fallanca, Pierpaolo Alongi, Elena Incerti, Luigi Gianolli, Maria Picchio, Irfan Kayani, Jamshed Bomanji |
| Abstract |
To evaluate the accuracy and prognostic value of FDG PET/CT for response assessment after treatment in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) when using the Deauville Criteria (DC) and the International Harmonization Project Criteria (IHPC). This retrospective study included 101 patients (35 HL, 66 NHL) who underwent early restaging FDG PET/CT after treatment. Scans were evaluated using the IHPC and DC. Two thresholds of positivity for the DC were used: a score of at least 3 (DC3, i.e. scores 3 - 5) and a score of at least 4 (DC4, i.e. a score of 4 or 5). Accuracy was assessed using conventional diagnostic procedures, multidisciplinary team case notes, further PET/CT scans and/or follow-up. Progression-free survival and overall survival were computed using the Kaplan-Meier method. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify predictors of outcome. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of FDG PET/CT for early restaging were, respectively, 92 %, 87 %, 74 %, 92 % and 86 % using DC4, 97 %, 76 %, 64 %, 98 % and 84 % using DC3, and 97 %, 67 %, 57 %, 98 % and 76 % using the IHPC. FDG PET/CT positivity was associated with a worse cumulative survival rate over a 2-year period when using DC4 in comparison with the IHPC (20 % vs. 49 %; p < 0.05) and DC3 (47 %; p < 0.05). Cox regression analysis showed different risks of progression in patients positive on FDG PET/CT using the IHPC, DC3 and DC4 (hazard ratios 1.57, 0.7 and 3.2, respectively). FDG PET/CT using DC4 showed higher diagnostic accuracy for HL and NHL than FDG PET/CT using either the IHPC or DC3, indicating its value in predicting clinical outcome after treatment. |
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% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 33 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 21% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 12% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 18% |
| Unknown | 7 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 52% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 8 | 24% |
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 16 May 2016.
All research outputs
#14,591,600
of 23,806,312 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
#1,749
of 3,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,348
of 300,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
#21
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,806,312 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 300,719 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 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 59% of its contemporaries.