ArticleEuropean radiology2013
Albumin-binding MR blood pool contrast agent improves diagnostic performance in human brain tumour: comparison of two contrast agents for glioblastoma.
Article in European radiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deciphering albumin-directed drug delivery by imaging.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2022Review
- Article
- Perfusion MRI in treatment evaluation of glioblastomas: Clinical relevance of current and future techniques.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2019Review
- High-resolution blood-pool-contrast-enhanced MR angiography in glioblastoma: tumor-associated neovascularization as a biomarker for patient survival. A preliminary study.Neuroradiology · 2016Article
- Gadofosveset-based biomarker of tissue albumin concentration: Technical validation in vitro and feasibility in vivo.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2015Article
- In silico evaluation of gadofosveset pharmacokinetics in different population groups using the Simcyp® simulator platform.In silico pharmacology · 2014Article
- B25716/1: a novel albumin-binding Gd-AAZTA MRI contrast agent with improved properties in tumor imaging.Journal of biological inorganic chemistry : JBIC : a publication of the Society of Biological Inorganic Chemistry · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe qualitatively and quantitatively compared MRI enhancement obtained with gadofosveset, an albumin-binding blood-pool contrast agent, and with gadobutrol, an extracellular contrast agent, in patients with glioblastoma.
methodsThirty-five patients (25 men; 64 ± 14 years) with histologically proven glioblastoma underwent MRI including pre- and post-contrast T1-weighted SE images acquired 5 min after gadobutrol (0.1 mmol/kg) and, 48 h later, images acquired with identical parameters 5 min and 3, 6, and 24 h after gadofosveset (0.03 mmol/kg). Lesion extent, delineation, internal morphology, multifocality, and global diagnostic preference were evaluated quantitatively for the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and contrast enhancement (CE).
resultsMean values of SNR, CNR, and tumour CE were highest 6 h after gadofosveset. Multifocality was seen in 17 (48.6 %) patients; additional lesions had stronger enhancement 6 h after gadofosveset in 12 patients (70.6 %). In 21 (60 %) patients, radiologists' global preference was highest in images acquired 6 h after gadofosveset (kappa = 0.764). In 22 patients (62.8 %), all qualitative endpoints were better at 5 min after gadobutrol than in images acquired 5 min after gadofosveset injection.
conclusionsGadobutrol gives significant tumour enhancement in early postcontrast imaging. However, images acquired 6 h after gadofosveset injection have significantly better diagnostic information endpoints and contrast enhancement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23085863What 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.