Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42667310›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2026

[

Hao Peng, Yu Liu, Jiucen Liang, Sha Yan, Wen Li, Zhidong Liu, Rusen Zhang, Ming Jiang, Linqi Zhang

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Hao Peng *Department of Nuclear Medicine, Guangzhou Institute of Cancer Research, the Affiliated Cancer Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, 78 Hengzhigang Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510095, PR China.
Yu Liu *Department of Radiology, Guangzhou Institute of Cancer Research, the Affiliated Cancer Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, 78 Hengzhigang Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510095, PR China.
Jiucen LiangDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Guangzhou Institute of Cancer Research, the Affiliated Cancer Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, 78 Hengzhigang Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510095, PR China.
Sha YanDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Guangzhou Institute of Cancer Research, the Affiliated Cancer Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, 78 Hengzhigang Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510095, PR China.
Wen LiDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Guangzhou Institute of Cancer Research, the Affiliated Cancer Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, 78 Hengzhigang Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510095, PR China.
Zhidong LiuDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Guangzhou Institute of Cancer Research, the Affiliated Cancer Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, 78 Hengzhigang Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510095, PR China.
Rusen ZhangDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Guangzhou Institute of Cancer Research, the Affiliated Cancer Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, 78 Hengzhigang Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510095, PR China. zhangrusen2015@163.com.
Ming JiangDepartment of Breast Surgery, Guangzhou Institute of Cancer Research, the Affiliated Cancer Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, 78 Hengzhigang Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510095, PR China. jiangmingzlyy@gzhmu.edu.cn.
Linqi ZhangDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Guangzhou Institute of Cancer Research, the Affiliated Cancer Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, 78 Hengzhigang Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510095, PR China. zhanglinqi0909@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0607-6300

Funding

Guangzhou Institute of Cancer Research, and the Guangdong Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation 2024A1515011956 and 2026A1515010381National Natural Science Foundation of China 82572348 and 82101994
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare the diagnostic performance of [

methodsThis is a post‑hoc analysis of data from a prospective single-center clinical trial. Patients with clinical suspicion of recurrence of breast cancer after surgery were consecutively enrolled and underwent both [

resultsA total of 44 patients with 880 lesions were included, of whom 40 patients (782 lesions) were confirmed to have recurrent disease. Compared with [

conclusionIn this cohort, [

Indexed as

[18F]FAPI-04 PET/CT[18F]FDG PET/CTBreast CancerRecurrence

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.