Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23645329›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2013

Accuracy of multidetector-row CT for restaging after neoadjuvant treatment in patients with oesophageal cancer.

Agnieszka Konieczny, Philipp Meyer, Annelies Schnider, Paul Komminoth, Mathias Schmid, Norbert Lombriser, Dominik Weishaupt

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

7 authors.

Agnieszka KoniecznyInstitute of Radiology, Triemli Hospital, Birmensdorferstrasse 497, CH-8063, Zürich, Switzerland.
Philipp Meyer
Annelies Schnider
Paul Komminoth
Mathias Schmid
Norbert Lombriser
Dominik Weishaupt

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo assess the diagnostic accuracy of 64-multidetector CT (MDCT) for restaging of patients with oesophageal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant therapy.

methodsResults of pathological staging were correlated with those from 64-MDCT before and after neoadjuvant treatment in 35 patients using the American Joint Committee on Cancer/TNM classification (7th edition). CT response was determined using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) method, modified for one-dimensional tumour diameter measurement.

results64-MDCT predicted T stage correctly in 34 % (12/35), overstaged in 49 % (17/35) and understaged in 17 % (6/35). Sensitivity/specificity values were as follows: T0, 20 %/92 %; T1-T2, 31 %/59 %; T3, 60 %/64 %; T4, 100 %/4 %. Negative predictive values for T3/T4 were 80 %/100 %. MDCT accurately predicted complete histopathological response in 20 % (accuracy 74 %) and overstaged in 80 %. Tumour regression grade was predicted correctly in only 8 % (2/25) and underestimated in 68 % (17/25). Accurate N stage was noted in 69 % (24/35).

conclusionAlthough MDCT tends to be able to exclude advanced tumour stages (T3, T4) with a higher likelihood, the diagnostic accuracy of high resolution MDCT for restaging oesophageal cancer and assessing the response to neoadjuvant therapy has not improved in comparison to older-generation CT. Therefore, the future assessment of oesophageal tumour response should focus on combined morphologic and metabolic imaging. KEY POINTS: • Multidetector CT (MDCT) has been beneficial for the evaluation of many tumours. • However diagnostic accuracy for restaging oesophageal cancer has not improved with MDCT. • MDCT tends to be able to exclude advanced tumour stages (T3/T4). • MDCT has a low accuracy for determining lymph node metastasis. • Oesophageal tumour response should be assessed by combined morphological and metabolic imaging.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBiopsyChemoradiotherapyEsophageal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedLymphatic MetastasisMaleMiddle AgedNeoadjuvant TherapyNeoplasm StagingPredictive Value of TestsReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.