Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26185325›Full record

Trial reportAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2015

The Benefits of High Relaxivity for Brain Tumor Imaging: Results of a Multicenter Intraindividual Crossover Comparison of Gadobenate Dimeglumine with Gadoterate Meglumine (The BENEFIT Study).

M Vaneckova, M Herman, M P Smith, M Mechl, K R Maravilla, J Weichet, M V Spampinato, J Žižka, F J Wippold, J J Baima and 11 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Reply.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2016
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors at 18 institutions in 6 countries.

M VaneckovaFrom the Charles University in Prague (M.V.), First Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic man.van@post.cz.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8784-7997
M HermanUniversity Hospital Olomouc (M.H.), Olomouc, Czech Republic.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9167-3435
M P SmithBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (M.P.S.), Boston, Massachusetts.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0775-6516
M MechlFaculty of Medicine (M.M.), University Hospital Brno, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1736-2310
K R MaravillaMR Research Laboratory (K.R.M.), University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9188-5374
J WeichetNa Homolce Hospital (J.W.), Prague, Czech Republic.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5774-9651
M V SpampinatoDepartment of Radiology and Radiological Science (M.V.S.), Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2040-1894
J ŽižkaUniversity Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Králové (J.Ž.), University Hospital Hradec Králové and Charles University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8035-0144
F J WippoldMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology (F.J.W.), Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5412-8307
J J BaimaClinical Radiologists, S.C. (J.J.B.), Springfield, Illinois.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4502-7851
R BabbelGood Samaritan Regional Medical Center (R.B.), Corvallis, Oregon.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0059-6081
E BültmannInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology (E.B.), Hannover, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4453-0612
R Y HuangHarvard Medical School (R.Y.H.), Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7661-797X
J-H BuhkUniversity Medical Center Hamburg Eppendorf (J.-H.B.), Hamburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8003-6446
A BonaféHopital Gui de Chauliac (A.B.), Montpellier, France.
C ColosimoPoliclinico "Agostino Gemelli" (C.C.), Rome, Italy.
S LuiWest China Hospital of Sichuan University (S.L.), Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
M A KirchinGlobal Medical & Regulatory Affairs (M.A.K.), Bracco Imaging S.p.A., Milan, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5803-7867
N ShenGlobal Medical & Regulatory Affairs (N.S., G.P., A.S.), Bracco Diagnostics, Monroe, New Jersey.
G PirovanoGlobal Medical & Regulatory Affairs (N.S., G.P., A.S.), Bracco Diagnostics, Monroe, New Jersey.
A SpinazziGlobal Medical & Regulatory Affairs (N.S., G.P., A.S.), Bracco Diagnostics, Monroe, New Jersey.
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission · USCharles University · CZAgostino Gemelli University Polyclinic · ITBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USBracco (Italy) · ITBrigham and Women's Hospital · USGood Samaritan Regional Medical Center · USHôpital Gui de Chauliac · FRMallinckrodt (United States) · USMasaryk University · CZMedical University of South Carolina · USMedizinische Hochschule Hannover · DENa Homolce Hospital · CZRadiology Associates · USSichuan University · CNUniversität Hamburg · DEUniversity Hospital Olomouc · CZUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeGadobenate dimeglumine (MultiHance) has higher r1 relaxivity than gadoterate meglumine (Dotarem) which may permit the use of lower doses for MR imaging applications. Our aim was to compare 0.1- and 0.05-mmol/kg body weight gadobenate with 0.1-mmol/kg body weight gadoterate for MR imaging assessment of brain tumors. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe performed crossover, intraindividual comparison of 0.1-mmol/kg gadobenate with 0.1-mmol/kg gadoterate (Arm 1) and 0.05-mmol/kg gadobenate with 0.1-mmol/kg gadoterate (Arm 2). Adult patients with suspected or known brain tumors were randomized to Arm 1 (70 patients) or Arm 2 (107 patients) and underwent 2 identical examinations at 1.5 T. The agents were injected in randomized-sequence order, and the 2 examinations were separated by 2-14 days. MR imaging scanners, imaging sequences (T1-weighted spin-echo and T1-weighted high-resolution gradient-echo), and acquisition timing were identical for the 2 examinations. Three blinded readers evaluated images for diagnostic information (degree of definition of lesion extent, lesion border delineation, visualization of lesion internal morphology, contrast enhancement) and quantitatively for percentage lesion enhancement and lesion-to-background ratio. Safety assessments were performed.

resultsIn Arm 1, a highly significant superiority (P < .002) of 0.1-mmol/kg gadobenate was demonstrated by all readers for all end points. In Arm 2, no significant differences (P > .1) were observed for any reader and any end point, with the exception of percentage enhancement for reader 2 (P < .05) in favor of 0.05-mmol/kg gadobenate. Study agent-related adverse events were reported by 2/169 (1.2%) patients after gadobenate and by 5/175 (2.9%) patients after gadoterate.

conclusionsSignificantly superior morphologic information and contrast enhancement are demonstrated on brain MR imaging with 0.1-mmol/kg gadobenate compared with 0.1-mmol/kg gadoterate. No meaningful differences were recorded between 0.05-mmol/kg gadobenate and 0.1-mmol/kg gadoterate.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBrain NeoplasmsContrast MediaCross-Over StudiesFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMeglumineMiddle AgedOrganometallic CompoundsContrast Mediagadobenic acidgadoterate meglumineMeglumineOrganometallic Compounds

Identifiers

PMID26185325
PMCPMC7968770
OpenAlexW2152415663

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.