ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2026
Evaluating the usefulness of 18F-FDG PET/MR in rectal cancer staging: a prospective comparison with histopathological findings.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate preoperative staging of rectal cancer (RC) is essential for treatment planning. MRI is the standard for local assessment but has limitations in evaluating nodal involvement and tumor deposits. Hybrid PET/MR combines morphological and metabolic imaging and may improve staging accuracy. This study assessed PET/MR performance in RC and regional lymph nodes staging compared with histopathology.
methodsSixteen patients with biopsy-proven rectal cancer underwent PET/MR with ^18F-FDG. Tumor size, T stage, nodal status, and tumor deposits were evaluated using multiparametric MR sequences (T1, T2, diffusion-weighted, contrast-enhanced) combined with PET. Imaging findings were compared to histopathological results. Diagnostic performance metrics, including accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV), were calculated with corresponding 95% confidence intervals.
resultsPET/MR accurately staged the primary tumor in 81.25% of cases (95% CI: 57.0-93.4), with sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 50.0%, PPV of 76.9%, and NPV of 100% for advanced T-stage assessment. Three cT3 tumors were downstaged to pT2; no tumors were upstaged. For nodal staging based on ESGAR criteria, diagnostic accuracy was 75.0% (95% CI: 50.5-89.8), with sensitivity of 57.1%, specificity of 88.9%, PPV of 80.0%, and NPV of 72.7%. Tumor deposits were not detected on imaging but were present in four specimens. Incidental findings included a biopsy-confirmed breast adenocarcinoma and one benign thyroid lesion.
conclusion18F-FDG PET/MR shows potential for accurate assessment of the primary tumor and reliable exclusion of advanced T-stage disease. However, its performance in nodal staging and tumor deposit detection remains limited. Given the small sample size and potential confounding from preoperative radiotherapy, these findings should be considered hypothesis-generating and require validation in larger prospective cohorts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.