ArticleLa Radiologia medica2012
MR imaging of rectal cancer before and after chemoradiation therapy.
Article in La Radiologia medica, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The value of four imaging modalities in diagnosing lymph node involvement in rectal cancer: an overview and adjusted indirect comparison.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2019Pooled it
- MRI for Rectal Cancer: Staging, mrCRM, EMVI, Lymph Node Staging and Post-Treatment Response.Clinical colorectal cancer · 2022Review
- Beyond Histologic Staging: Emerging Imaging Strategies in Colorectal Cancer with Special Focus on Magnetic Resonance Imaging.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2016Review
- Magnetic resonance imaging in rectal cancer: a surgeon's perspective.World journal of gastroenterology · 2014Review
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
purposeThis study was done to determine the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in patients with rectal carcinoma by comparing post-chemoradiation MR imaging with pathological specimens. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe enrolled 39 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. All patients received chemoradiation therapy before surgery and neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy followed by MR imaging. MR images were analysed by a team of two expert radiologists unaware of the clinical and histopathological findings.
resultsFollowing neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy, the analysis of MR images showed 23 (59%) patients with a rectal disease staged ≤T2 and 16 (41%) with a disease staged >T2. Post-treatment histological staging (TNM) revealed 13 patients with a disease >T2 and 26 patients with a disease ≤T2. Cohen's kappa to measure concordance between post-chemoradiation MR staging and histological response showed 83.6% concordance for disease confined to the serosa (≤T3): concordance was 97.22% for disease ≤N1 and 33.33% for disease >N1.
conclusionsMR imaging is critical for discovering T3 disease; moreover, morphological MR imaging does not always provide the opportunity to discern small residual cancer cells hidden in fibrotic tissue that could cause involvement of circumferential resection margin (CRM) on histology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22434494What 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.