Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25421725›Full record

ReviewClinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research2015

Imaging intratumor heterogeneity: role in therapy response, resistance, and clinical outcome.

James P B O'Connor, Chris J Rose, John C Waterton, Richard A D Carano, Geoff J M Parker, Alan Jackson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 400 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
400citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

400 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. MRI-based perfusion-diffusion habitat analysis for characterizing intratumoral heterogeneity in rectal adenocarcinoma.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

340 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

James P B O'ConnorCRUK-EPSRC Cancer Imaging Centre in Cambridge and Manchester, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom. Department of Radiology, Christie Hospital, Manchester, United Kingdom. james.o'connor@manchester.ac.uk.
Chris J RoseCRUK-EPSRC Cancer Imaging Centre in Cambridge and Manchester, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
John C WatertonCRUK-EPSRC Cancer Imaging Centre in Cambridge and Manchester, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom. R&D Personalised Healthcare and Biomarkers, AstraZeneca, Macclesfield, United Kingdom.
Richard A D CaranoBiomedical Imaging Department, Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, California.
Geoff J M ParkerCRUK-EPSRC Cancer Imaging Centre in Cambridge and Manchester, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Alan JacksonCRUK-EPSRC Cancer Imaging Centre in Cambridge and Manchester, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.

Funding

Cancer Research UK 16465Cancer Research UK 18097Cancer Research UK A15267Cancer Research UK A18097
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tumors exhibit genomic and phenotypic heterogeneity, which has prognostic significance and may influence response to therapy. Imaging can quantify the spatial variation in architecture and function of individual tumors through quantifying basic biophysical parameters such as CT density or MRI signal relaxation rate; through measurements of blood flow, hypoxia, metabolism, cell death, and other phenotypic features; and through mapping the spatial distribution of biochemical pathways and cell signaling networks using PET, MRI, and other emerging molecular imaging techniques. These methods can establish whether one tumor is more or less heterogeneous than another and can identify subregions with differing biology. In this article, we review the image analysis methods currently used to quantify spatial heterogeneity within tumors. We discuss how analysis of intratumor heterogeneity can provide benefit over more simple biomarkers such as tumor size and average function. We consider how imaging methods can be integrated with genomic and pathology data, instead of being developed in isolation. Finally, we identify the challenges that must be overcome before measurements of intratumoral heterogeneity can be used routinely to guide patient care.

Indexed as

Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedAnimalsDiagnostic ImagingGenetic HeterogeneityHumansNeoplasms

Identifiers

PMID25421725
PMCPMC4688961

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.