ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2016
Assessment of metastatic colorectal cancer with hybrid imaging: comparison of reading performance using different combinations of anatomical and functional imaging techniques in PET/MRI and PET/CT in a short case series.
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 9 of them syntheses 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
43 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 91 citations in OpenAlex.
- FDG-PET/MRI in colorectal cancer care: an updated systematic review.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Pooled it
- Diagnostic performance of whole-body [European radiology · 2024Pooled it
- Lymph nodes primary staging of colorectal cancer in 18F-FDG PET/MRI: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of medical research · 2023Pooled it
- [18F]FDG PET/CT versus [18F]FDG PET/MRI for the diagnosis of colorectal liver metastasis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Diagnostic performance of [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022Pooled it
- [18F]FDG PET/MRI in rectal cancer.Annals of nuclear medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging for colorectal liver metastasis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2020Pooled it
- Diagnostic performance of [European radiology · 2019Pooled it
- Diagnostic Performance of Whole-Body PET/MRI for Detecting Malignancies in Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis.PloS one · 2016Pooled it
- Integrated versus separate reading of F-18 FDG-PET/CT and MRI for abdominal malignancies - effect on staging outcomes and diagnostic confidence.European radiology · 2019Trial
- [(68)Ga]DOTATATE PET/MRI and [(18)F]FDG PET/CT are complementary and superior to diffusion-weighted MR imaging for radioactive-iodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2016Trial
- PET/MR Imaging of the Gastrointestinal Tract.Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America · 2026Review
- Diagnostic performance of [Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Performance of [World journal of nuclear medicine · 2025Review
- Article
- PET/MRI in colorectal and anal cancers: an update.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2023Review
- International EANM-SNMMI-ISMRM consensus recommendation for PET/MRI in oncology.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023Article
- Is It Really Gone? Assessing Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy in Rectal Cancer.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2023Review
- A lesson in humility: the added values of PET-MRI over PET-CT in detecting malignant hepatic lesions.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023Article
- Value of Primary Rectal Tumor PET/MRI in the Prediction of Synchronic Metastatic Disease.Molecular imaging and biology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose was to investigate the diagnostic performance of different combinations of anatomical and functional imaging techniques in PET/MRI and PET/CT for the evaluation of metastatic colorectal cancer lesions.
methodsImage data of 15 colorectal cancer patients (FDG-PET/CT and subsequent FDG-PET/MRI) were retrospectively evaluated by two readers in five reading sessions: MRI (morphology) alone, MRI/diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI), MRI/PET, MRI/DWI/PET; and PET/CT. Diagnostic performance of lesion detection with each combination was assessed in general and organ-based. The reference standard was given by histology and/or follow-up imaging. Separate analysis of mucinous tumours was performed.
resultsOne hundred and eighty lesions (110 malignant) were evaluated (intestine n = 6, liver n = 37, lymph nodes n = 55, lung n = 4, and peritoneal n = 74). The overall lesion-based diagnostic accuracy was 0.46 for MRI, 0.47 for MRI/DWI, 0.57 for MRI/PET, 0.69 for MRI/DWI/PET and 0.66 for PET/CT. In the organ-based assessment, MRI/DWI/PET showed the highest accuracy for liver metastases (0.74), a comparable accuracy to PET/CT in peritoneal lesions (0.55), and in lymph node metastases (0.84). The accuracy in mucinous tumour lesions was limited in all modalities (MRI/DWI/PET = 0.52).
conclusionsPET/MRI including DWI is comparable to PET/CT in the evaluation of colorectal cancer metastases, with a markedly higher accuracy when using combined imaging data than the modalities separately. Further improvement is needed in the imaging of peritoneal carcinomatosis and mucinous tumours.
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.