Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25481515›Full record

ReviewAcademic radiology2015

Methods and challenges in quantitative imaging biomarker development.

Richard G Abramson, Kirsteen R Burton, John-Paul J Yu, Ernest M Scalzetti, Thomas E Yankeelov, Andrew B Rosenkrantz, Mishal Mendiratta-Lala, Brian J Bartholmai, Dhakshinamoorthy Ganeshan, Leon Lenchik and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Academic radiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Recommendations for improved reproducibility of ADC derivation on behalf of the Elekta MRI-linac consortium image analysis working group.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Small Blob Detector Using Bi-Threshold Constrained Adaptive Scales.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2021
    Article
  18. Feasibility of DW-MRI analysis of salivary glands during head and neck radiotherapy.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

11 authors.

Richard G AbramsonDepartment of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Vanderbilt University, 1161 21st Avenue South, CCC-1121 MCN, Nashville, TN 37232-2675. Electronic address: richard.abramson@vanderbilt.edu.
Kirsteen R BurtonDepartment of Medical Imaging and Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
John-Paul J YuDepartment of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, California.
Ernest M ScalzettiDepartment of Radiology, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse New York.
Thomas E YankeelovInstitute of Imaging Science, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee.
Andrew B RosenkrantzDepartment of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, New York.
Mishal Mendiratta-LalaAbdominal and Cross-Sectional Interventional Radiology, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan.
Brian J BartholmaiDivision of Radiology Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Dhakshinamoorthy GaneshanDepartment of Abdominal Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Leon LenchikDepartment of Radiology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Medical Center Boulevard, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Rathan M SubramaniamRussell H Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.

Funding

Tumor Immunology and Microenvironment Research ProgramP30CA068485 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI MATTHEW J TYSKA · 1995 to 2026
$172.8M
TISSUE CoreP50CA098131 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI PARK, BEN HO, PIETENPOL, JENNIFER A · 2003 to 2024
$48.7M
Biomedical Imaging for Clinician ScientistsT32EB001631 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI THOMAS M LINK · 2005 to 2026
$5.6M
Quantitative MRI for Predicting Response of Breast Cancer to Neoadjuvant TherapyU01CA142565 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI KARCZMAR, GREGORY S., NANDA, RITA · 2010 to 2019
$4.5M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA068485NCI NIH HHS P50 CA098131NCI NIH HHS U01 CA142565NCI NIH HHS U01CA142565NIBIB NIH HHS T32 EB001631
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Academic radiology is poised to play an important role in the development and implementation of quantitative imaging (QI) tools. This article, drafted by the Association of University Radiologists Radiology Research Alliance Quantitative Imaging Task Force, reviews current issues in QI biomarker research. We discuss motivations for advancing QI, define key terms, present a framework for QI biomarker research, and outline challenges in QI biomarker development. We conclude by describing where QI research and development is currently taking place and discussing the paramount role of academic radiology in this rapidly evolving field.

Indexed as

Molecular ProbesMolecular Probe TechniquesAnimalsBiomarkersHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesMolecular ImagingBiomarkersMolecular Probesbiomarker developmentquantitative imagingRadiology

Identifiers

PMID25481515
PMCPMC4258641

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.