ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2013
Separate calculation of DW-MRI in assessing therapeutic effect in liver tumors in rats.
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo explore whether the antitumor effect of a vascular disrupting agent (VDA) would be enhanced by combining with an antiangiogenic agent, and whether such synergistic effects can be effectively evaluated with separate calculation of diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI).
methodsThirty-seven rats with implanted liver tumors were randomized into the following three groups: (1) ZD6126, a kind of VDA; (2) ZDTHA, ZD6126 in combination with an antiangiogenic, thalidomide; and (3) control. Morphological DW-MRI were performed and quantified before, 4 h and 2 d after treatment. The apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values were calculated separately for low b values (ADC(low)), high b values (ADC(high)) and all b values (ADC(all)). The tissue perfusion contribution, ADC(perf), was calculated as ADC(low)-ADC(high). Imaging findings were finally verified by histopathology.
resultsThe combination therapy with ZDTHA significantly delayed tumor growth due to synergistic effects by inducing cumulative tumor necrosis. In addition to delaying tumor growth, ZDTHA caused tumor necrosis in an additive manner, which was verified by HE staining. Although both ADC(high) and ADC(all) in the ZD6126 and ZDTHA groups were significantly higher compared to those in the control group on day 2, the entire tumor ADC(high) of ZDTHA was even higher than that of ZD6126, but the significant difference was not observed for ADC(all) between ZDTHA and ZD6126. This indicated that the perfusion insensitive ADC(high) values calculated from high b value images performed significantly better than ADC(all) for the monitoring of tumor necrosis on day 2. The perfusion sensitive ADC(perf) derived from ADC(low) by excluding high b value effects could better reflect the reduction of blood flow due to the vessel shutdown induced by ZD6126, compared to the ADC(low) at 4 h. The ADC(perf) could provide valuable perfusion information from DW-MRI data.
conclusionThe separate calculation of ADC is more useful than conventional averaged ADC in evaluating the efficacy of combination therapy with ZD6126 and thalidomide for solid tumors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.