Trial reportEuropean radiology2014
Using R2* values to evaluate brain tumours on magnetic resonance imaging: preliminary results.
Trial report in European radiology, 2014. 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 diagnostic value of quantitative analysis of ASL, DSC-MRI and DKI in the grading of cerebral gliomas: a meta-analysis.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2020Pooled it
- Simultaneous time of flight-MRA and T2* imaging for cerebrovascular MRI.Neuroradiology · 2021Article
- Rapid multicontrast brain imaging on a 0.35T MR-linac.Medical physics · 2020Article
- Detection of early alterations in radiologically normal-appearing brain regions before recurrence of high-grade glioma using multiparameter mapping and diffusion tensor imaging.Neuro-oncology advancesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the usefulness of the R2* value in assessing the histopathological grade of glioma at magnetic resonance imaging and differentiating various brain tumours.
methodsSixty-four patients with brain tumours underwent R2* mapping and diffusion-weighted imaging examinations. ANOVA was performed to analyse R2* values among four groups of glioma and among high-grade gliomas (grades III and IV), low-grade gliomas (grades I and II), meningiomas, and brain metastasis. Spearman's correlation coefficients were used to determine the relationships between the R2* values or apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and the histopathological grade of gliomas. R2* values of low- and high-grade gliomas were analysed with the receiver-operator characteristic curve.
resultsR2* values were significantly different among high-grade gliomas, low-grade gliomas, meningiomas, and brain metastasis, but not between grade I and grade II or between grade III and grade IV. The R2* value (18.73) of high-grade gliomas provided a very high sensitivity and specificity for differentiating low-grade gliomas. A strong correlation existed between the R2* value and the pathological grade of gliomas.
conclusionsR2* mapping is a useful sequence for determining grade of gliomas and in distinguishing benign from malignant tumours. R2* values are better than ADC for characterising gliomas. KEY POINTS: • Magnetic resonance imaging parameters are increasingly used to assess cerebral lesions. • R2* values are better than diffusion weighting for characterising gliomas. • R2* values can help distinguish among different grades of glioma. • Significant difference existed in R2* values between high- and low-grade gliomas.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24275803What 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.