ArticleEuropean radiology2014
Dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasonographic (DCE-US) assessment of the early response after combined gemcitabine and HIFU with low-power treatment for the mouse xenograft model of human pancreatic cancer.
Article in European radiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05262452 (Therapeutic Efficacy and Safety of Concurrent FOLFIRINOX Plus HIFU for Locally Advanced/Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 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.
Therapeutic Efficacy and Safety of Concurrent FOLFIRINOX Plus HIFU for Locally Advanced/Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Prospective Single-center, Single-arm, Investigator-initiated, Open-labeled, Exploratory Clinical Trial
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Focused ultrasound and concurrent chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer: A systematic review.Journal of surgical oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Innovative Experimental Ultrasound and US-Related Techniques Using the Murine Model in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- CD133-Targeted Hybrid Nanovesicles for Fluorescent/Ultrasonic Imaging-Guided HIFU Pancreatic Cancer Therapy.International journal of nanomedicine · 2023Article
- Early Assessment of Chemoradiotherapy Response for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma by Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- High-intensity focused ultrasound therapy for pancreatic cancer.Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001) · 2022Review
- Latest Advances in the Use of Therapeutic Focused Ultrasound in the Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer.Cancers · 2022Review
- Novel Therapeutic Method for Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer-The Impact of the Long-Term Research in Therapeutic Effect of High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) Therapy.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Article
- A portable high-intensity focused ultrasound system for the pancreas with 3D electronic steering: a preclinical study in a swine model.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 2018Article
- Article
- Article
- High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) for pancreatic carcinoma: evaluation of feasibility, reduction of tumour volume and pain intensity.European radiology · 2016Observational
- Article
- Therapeutic Effects of Microbubbles Added to Combined High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound and Chemotherapy in a Pancreatic Cancer Xenograft Model.Korean journal of radiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess therapeutic efficacy of gemcitabine and HIFU for a mouse model of pancreatic cancer, and the role of DCE-US for predicting early treatment response compared with pathology. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn 48 PANC-1- nude mice (G1, HIFU_higher power [n = 14]; G2, gemcitabine [n = 12]; G3, combined gemcitabine and HIFU_low power [n = 12]; and G4, control [n = 10]), pulsed HIFU or gemcitabine therapy was used. DCE-US was performed 1 day before and after first treatment. Seven DCE-US perfusion parameters were obtained. Therapeutic efficacy was estimated using necrotic fraction and apoptosis. Correlation between tumour size and US perfusion parameters was analysed.
resultsPathology results showed that combined gemcitabine and HIFU using low-power treatment had a more effective response than other treatments, including in the control group, i.e. necrotic fraction: 40.5 ± 4.9 vs. 16.9 ± 8.0, p = 0.000 and apoptosis: 44.3 ± 29.4 vs. 7.9 ± 4.9, p = 0.002. In this group, US perfusion parameters, including peak intensity (22.6 ± 22.6 vs. 9.6 ± 6.3, p = 0.002), AUC (961.8 ± 96.9 vs. 884.4 ± 91.4, p = 0.000), and AUCout (799.9 ± 75.6 vs. 747.1 ± 77.9, p = 0.000), had significantly decreased 1 day following first treatment (p < 0.05). In addition, peak intensity, AUC, and AUCout showed a tendency to decrease in treated groups. Alternatively, peak intensity, AUC, and AUCout showed a tendency to increase in control group.
conclusionGemcitabine and HIFU were more effective and safer than other treatments. US perfusion parameters were useful for predicting early therapeutic response 1 day following treatment. KEY POINTS: Recently, treatment of pancreatic cancer has changed based on a multidisciplinary approach. Combined gemcitabine_HIFU demonstrated more effective therapeutic response than other treatments. DCE-US is useful for predicting early therapeutic response 1 day after treatment. In the combined group, PI, AUC, and AUC (out) decreased 1 day after treatment.
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.