Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22847762›Full record

ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2013

Assessing the reproducibility of dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in a murine model of breast cancer.

Stephanie L Barnes, Jennifer G Whisenant, Mary E Loveless, Gregory D Ayers, Thomas E Yankeelov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. MR Imaging Biomarkers in Oncology Clinical Trials.Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America · 2016
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Techniques and applications of dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in cancer.Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference · 2014
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
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

5 authors.

Stephanie L BarnesInstitute of Imaging Science, Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee 37232-2675, USA.
Jennifer G Whisenant
Mary E Loveless
Gregory D Ayers
Thomas E Yankeelov

Funding

Tumor Immunology and Microenvironment Research ProgramP30CA068485 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI MATTHEW J TYSKA · 1995 to 2026
$172.8M
Multidisciplinary Training in Basic and Translational Imaging of CancerR25CA092043 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI MANNING, HENRY CHARLES · 2001 to 2015
$6.6M
Evaluation and Validation of Imaging Biomarkers of Tumor Response to TreatmentR01CA138599 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI MCINTYRE, JAMES OLIVER · 2010 to 2015
$2.2M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA068485NCI NIH HHS P30 CA68485NCI NIH HHS R01 CA138599NCI NIH HHS R01CA138599NCI NIH HHS R25 CA092043NCI NIH HHS R25CA092043
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quantitative dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging estimates parameters related to tissue vascularity and volume fractions; additionally, semiquantitative parameters such as the initial area under the curve can be utilized to describe tissue behavior. The aim of this study was to establish the reproducibility of quantitative and semiquantitative analysis of dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in a murine model of breast cancer. For each animal, a T1-weighted, gradient-echo sequence was used to acquire two sets of dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging data separated by 5 h. Data were acquired at both a 0.05 mm3 (128(2) , n=12) and a 0.2 mm3 (64(2), n=12) resolution, and analysis was performed using both the Tofts-Kety (to estimate Ktrans and ve) and extended Tofts-Kety (Ktrans, ve, and vp) models. Reproducibility analysis was performed for both the center slice and the total tumor volume for all parameters. For the total volume analysis, the repeatability index for Ktrans is 0.073 min(-1) in the standard model analysis and 0.075 min(-1) in the extended model analysis at the 128(2) acquisition. For the 64(2) acquisition, the values are 0.089 and 0.063 min(-1) for the standard and extended models, respectively. The repeatability index for initial area under the curve was 0.0039 and 0.0042 mM min for the 128(2) and 64(2) acquisitions, respectively.

Indexed as

Gadolinium DTPAAnimalsCell Line, TumorContrast MediaFemaleHumansImage EnhancementImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedImaging, Three-DimensionalMagnetic Resonance ImagingMammary Neoplasms, ExperimentalMiceMice, NudeReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityTumor BurdenContrast MediaGadolinium DTPA

Identifiers

PMID22847762
PMCPMC3740769

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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 OpenQuestion graph.