ArticleEuropean radiology2011
Commercial software upgrades may significantly alter Perfusion CT parameter values in colorectal cancer.
Article in European radiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Automated Quantitative Analysis of CT Perfusion to Classify Vascular Phenotypes of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.Cancers · 2024Article
- Review of tracer kinetic models in evaluation of gliomas using dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- Pancreatic CT perfusion: quantitative meta-analysis of disease discrimination, protocol development, and effect of CT parameters.Insights into imaging · 2023Article
- Effect of scan duration on CT perfusion values in metastases from renal cell carcinoma.Research in diagnostic and interventional imaging · 2023Article
- Comparison of automated beam hardening correction (ABHC) algorithms for myocardial perfusion imaging using computed tomography.Medical physics · 2021Article
- The role of acquisition and quantification methods in myocardial blood flow estimability for myocardial perfusion imaging CT.Physics in medicine and biology · 2018Article
- Variability and Reproducibility of 3Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Use of patient outcome endpoints to identify the best functional CT imaging parameters in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients.The British journal of radiology · 2018Article
- Reproducibility of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI in the study of brain gliomas: a comparison of data obtained using different commercial software.La Radiologia medica · 2017Article
- Patient characteristics influencing the variability of distributed parameter-based models in DCE-CT kinetic analysis.Veterinary and comparative oncology · 2017Article
- Metastases to the liver from neuroendocrine tumors: effect of duration of scan acquisition on CT perfusion values.Radiology · 2013Article
- Characterization of tumor heterogeneity using dynamic contrast enhanced CT and FDG-PET in non-small cell lung cancer.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2013Article
- Standardising measurement of tumour vascularity by imaging: recommendations for ultrasound, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography.European radiology · 2012Review
- Effect of pre-enhancement set point on computed tomographic perfusion values in normal liver and metastases to the liver from neuroendocrine tumors.Journal of computer assisted tomographyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine how commercial software platform upgrades impact on derived parameters for colorectal cancer. MATERIALS AND
methodsFollowing ethical approval, 30 patients with suspected colorectal cancer underwent Perfusion CT using integrated 64 detector PET/CT before surgery. Analysis was performed using software based on modified distributed parameter analysis (Perfusion software version 4; Perfusion 4.0), then repeated using the previous version (Perfusion software version 3; Perfusion 3.0). Tumour blood flow (BF), blood volume (BV), mean transit time (MTT) and permeability surface area product (PS) were determined for identical regions-of-interest. Slice-by-slice and 'whole tumour' variance was assessed by Bland-Altman analysis.
resultsMean BF, BV and PS was 20.4%, 59.5%, and 106% higher, and MTT 14.3% shorter for Perfusion 4.0 than Perfusion 3.0. The mean difference (95% limits of agreement) were +13.5 (-44.9 to 72.0), +2.61 (-0.06 to 5.28), -1.23 (-6.83 to 4.36), and +14.2 (-4.43 to 32.8) for BF, BV, MTT and PS respectively. Within subject coefficient of variation was 36.6%, 38.0%, 27.4% and 60.6% for BF, BV, MTT and PS respectively indicating moderate to poor agreement.
conclusionSoftware version upgrades of the same software platform may result in significantly different parameter values, requiring adjustments for cross-version comparison.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20922392What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.