ArticleInternational journal of molecular imaging2011
A comparison of imaging techniques to monitor tumor growth and cancer progression in living animals.
Article in International journal of molecular imaging, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 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
36 citing papers in PubMed.
- Determinants of Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T Cell Success: In Vitro and In Vivo Preclinical Assessment.Cancers · 2026Review
- Ultrasound imaging-guided protocol for monitoring tumor growth in orthotopic rat model of hepatocellular carcinoma.World journal of hepatology · 2025Article
- Between Prometheus and Thanatos: Reflections on Intracardiac Injection Models for Metastasis in Mice.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2025Review
- Exploring the landscape of current in vitro and in vivo models and their relevance for targeted radionuclide theranostics.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025Review
- Herbs and their Active Constituents for Gastric Cancer and Related Problems - Preclinical and Clinical Studies.Current protein & peptide science · 2025Review
- Accelerated growth and local progression of radiorecurrent prostate cancer in an orthotopic bioluminescent mouse model.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- In Vivo Bioluminescence Imaging of Tumor Progression in the Lewis Lung Carcinoma Orthotopic Mouse Model: A Comparison Between the Tail Vein Injection and Intranasal Instillation Methods.Current protocols · 2024Article
- A Comparison of the Sensitivity and Cellular Detection Capabilities of Magnetic Particle Imaging and Bioluminescence Imaging.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2024Article
- Imaging Approaches in Cancer Biology.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine · 2024Review
- Article
- Comparison between an SGLT2 inhibitor and insulin in tumor-to-tissue contrasts inScientific reports · 2023Article
- Article
- Micro-CT acquisition and image processing to track and characterize pulmonary nodules in mice.Nature protocols · 2023Review
- Nanotheranostic Strategies for Cancer Immunotherapy.Small methods · 2022Review
- Three-Dimensional Deep-Tissue Functional and Molecular Imaging by Integrated Photoacoustic, Ultrasound, and Angiographic Tomography (PAUSAT).IEEE transactions on medical imaging · 2022Article
- Non-Invasive Imaging and Scoring of Peritoneal Metastases in Small Preclinical Animal Models Using Ultrasound: A Preliminary Trial.Biomedicines · 2022Article
- Monitoring and modulation of the tumor microenvironment for enhanced cancer modeling.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2022Review
- Methods and criteria for validating the multimodal functions of perinatal derivatives when used in oncological and antimicrobial applications.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
- Bioluminescent Tumor Signal Is Mouse Strain and Pelt Color Dependent: Experience in a Disseminated Lymphoma Model.Molecular imaging and biology · 2021Article
- Monitoring subcutaneous tumors using Mueller polarimetry: study on two types of tumors.Biomedical optics express · 2021Article
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
Introduction and Purpose. Monitoring solid tumor growth and metastasis in small animals is important for cancer research. Noninvasive techniques make longitudinal studies possible, require fewer animals, and have greater statistical power. Such techniques include FDG positron emission tomography (FDG-PET), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and optical imaging, comprising bioluminescence imaging (BLI) and fluorescence imaging (FLI). This study compared the performance and usability of these methods in the context of mouse tumor studies. Methods. B16 tumor-bearing mice (n = 4 for each study) were used to compare practicality, performance for small tumor detection and tumor burden measurement. Using RETAAD mice, which develop spontaneous melanomas, we examined the performance of MRI (n = 6 mice) and FDG-PET (n = 10 mice) for tumor identification. Results. Overall, BLI and FLI were the most practical techniques tested. Both BLI and FDG-PET identified small nonpalpable tumors, whereas MRI and FLI only detected macroscopic, clinically evident tumors. FDG-PET and MRI performed well in the identification of tumors in terms of specificity, sensitivity, and positive predictive value. Conclusion. Each of the four methods has different strengths that must be understood before selecting them for use.
Identifiers
What 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.