ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2026
CXCR4-targeted PET/CT with [¹⁸F]AlF-NOTA-QHY-04 in primary central nervous system lymphoma: a prospective comparison with MRI and [¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT.
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 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
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of [¹⁸F]AlF-NOTA-QHY-04 PET/CT, a novel CXCR4-targeted imaging agent, in detecting primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) at initial diagnosis and suspected recurrence, in comparison with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) and [¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT.
methodsWe prospectively enrolled patients with suspected PCNSL between September 2022 and December 2024. A total of 29 patients underwent both CE-MRI and [¹⁸F]AlF-NOTA-QHY-04 PET/CT, with 20 patients also receiving [¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT. Biopsy pathology served as the reference standard for newly diagnosed lesions. Recurrence was assessed using a composite reference standard based on CE-MRI, clinical follow-up, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) findings when available; an exploratory sensitivity analysis excluded MRI-dependent cases. Imaging parameters including the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), mean standardized uptake value (SUVmean), and tumor-to-background ratios (TBR) were calculated. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and compared.
resultsSix treatment-naïve patients (14 lesions) and 16 patients with recurrence (16 lesions) were confirmed, along with 7 patients without recurrence. Both primary and recurrent lesions showed intense tracer uptake on [¹⁸F]AlF-NOTA-QHY-04 PET/CT, characterized by notably high TBR. In the 20-patient subgroup undergoing both PET scans, [¹⁸F]AlF-NOTA-QHY-04 demonstrated significantly lower absolute SUVmax compared to [¹⁸F]FDG (median: 2.42 vs. 11.73, P < 0.001) but a substantially higher TBR-SUVmax (median: 42.75 vs. 1.07, P < 0.001), leading to the identification of more positive lesions (14 vs. 7, P = 0.023). Relative to the composite reference standard, [¹⁸F]AlF-NOTA-QHY-04 PET/CT achieved sensitivity and accuracy (87.50% and 90.91%, respectively) comparable to CE-MRI (100% for both, P > 0.05) and significantly superior to [¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT (43.75% and 59.09%, P = 0.023). ROC analysis identified [¹⁸F]AlF-NOTA-QHY-04 SUVmax as the optimal diagnostic parameter (AUC = 0.979).
conclusion[¹⁸F]AlF-NOTA-QHY-04 PET/CT demonstrated high tumor-to-background contrast in PCNSL, consistent with its low background brain uptake. It shows diagnostic accuracy comparable to CE-MRI and significantly superior to [¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT, demonstrating high potential as a valuable imaging tool for the diagnosis and restaging of PCNSL.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42056569What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.