Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24563179›Full record

Trial reportEuropean radiology2014

Whole-body MRI for initial staging of paediatric lymphoma: prospective comparison to an FDG-PET/CT-based reference standard.

Annemieke S Littooij, Thomas C Kwee, Ignasi Barber, Claudio Granata, Malou A Vermoolen, Goya Enríquez, József Zsíros, Shui Yen Soh, Bart de Keizer, Frederik J A Beek and 4 more

Abstract readClinical TrialComparative StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 42 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
9.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 102 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Melanoma in pregnancy.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2023
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Whole-body MRI versus an [European radiology · 2021
    Article
  19. Whole-body [EJNMMI research · 2021
    Article
  20. 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

14 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Annemieke S LittooijDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Centre Utrecht/Wilhelmina Children's Hospital, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands, alittooij@hotmail.com.
Thomas C Kwee
Ignasi Barber
Claudio Granata
Malou A Vermoolen
Goya Enríquez
József Zsíros
Shui Yen Soh
Bart de Keizer
Frederik J A Beek
Monique G Hobbelink
Marc B Bierings
Jaap Stoker
Rutger A J Nievelstein
Wilhelmina Children's Hospital · NLHospital Materno-Infantil · ESKK Women's and Children's Hospital · SGUniversity of Amsterdam · NLIstituto Giannina Gaslini · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare whole-body MRI, including diffusion-weighted imaging (whole-body MRI-DWI), with FDG-PET/CT for staging newly diagnosed paediatric lymphoma.

methodsA total of 36 children with newly diagnosed lymphoma prospectively underwent both whole-body MRI-DWI and FDG-PET/CT. Whole-body MRI-DWI was successfully performed in 33 patients (mean age 13.9 years). Whole-body MRI-DWI was independently evaluated by two blinded observers. After consensus reading, an unblinded expert panel evaluated the discrepant findings between whole-body MRI-DWI and FDG-PET/CT and used bone marrow biopsy, other imaging data and clinical information to derive an FDG-PET/CT-based reference standard.

resultsInterobserver agreement of whole-body MRI-DWI was good [all nodal sites together (κ = 0.79); all extranodal sites together (κ = 0.69)]. There was very good agreement between the consensus whole-body MRI-DWI- and FDG-PET/CT-based reference standard for nodal (κ = 0.91) and extranodal (κ = 0.94) staging. The sensitivity and specificity of consensus whole-body MRI-DWI were 93 % and 98 % for nodal staging and 89 % and 100 % for extranodal staging, respectively. Following removal of MRI reader errors, the disease stage according to whole-body MRI-DWI agreed with the reference standard in 28 of 33 patients.

conclusionsOur results indicate that whole-body MRI-DWI is feasible for staging paediatric lymphoma and could potentially serve as a good radiation-free alternative to FDG-PET/CT. KEYPOINTS: • Accurate staging is important for treatment planning and assessing prognosis • Whole-body MRI-DWI could be a good radiation-free alternative to FDG-PET/CT • Interobserver agreement of whole-body MRI-DWI is good • Agreement between whole-body MRI and the FDG-PET/CT reference standard is good • Most discrepancies were caused by suboptimal accuracy of size measurements on MRI.

Indexed as

Fluorodeoxyglucose F18RadiopharmaceuticalsAdolescentChildDiffusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingFemaleHumansLymphomaMaleNeoplasm StagingObserver VariationPositron-Emission TomographyPrognosisProspective StudiesReference StandardsSensitivity and SpecificityFluorodeoxyglucose F18Radiopharmaceuticals

Identifiers

PMID24563179
OpenAlexW1986038528

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.