Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26788865›Full record

ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2016

Applying amide proton transfer-weighted MRI to distinguish pseudoprogression from true progression in malignant gliomas.

Bo Ma, Jaishri O Blakeley, Xiaohua Hong, Hongyan Zhang, Shanshan Jiang, Lindsay Blair, Yi Zhang, Hye-Young Heo, Mingzhi Zhang, Peter C M van Zijl and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract readControlled Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 102 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
102citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

102 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 169 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

42 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

11 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Bo MaDepartment of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Jaishri O BlakeleyDepartment of Neurology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Xiaohua HongDepartment of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Hongyan ZhangDepartment of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Shanshan JiangDepartment of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Lindsay BlairDepartment of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Yi ZhangDepartment of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Hye-Young HeoDepartment of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Mingzhi ZhangDepartment of Oncology, First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, PR China.
Peter C M van ZijlDepartment of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Jinyuan ZhouDepartment of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Johns Hopkins University · USKennedy Krieger Institute · USFirst Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University · CNHenan Provincial People's Hospital · CNZero to Three · US

Funding

TR&D 4: Algorithms for functional and anatomical brain analysisP41EB015909 · NIBIB · HUGO W. MOSER RES INST KENNEDY KRIEGER · PI VAN ZIJL, PETER CM · 2012 to 2020
$13.1M
Novel Approaches for CEST Labeling, Detection, Quantification and TranslationR01EB015032 · NIBIB · HUGO W. MOSER RES INST KENNEDY KRIEGER · PI VAN ZIJL, PETER CM · 2011 to 2019
$3.9M
Amide Proton Transfer (APT) MRI of Brain Tumors at 3T and 7TR01EB009731 · NIBIB · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI ZHOU, JINYUAN · 2009 to 2016
$2.9M
Academic-Industrial Partnership to Develop Clinical Brain Cancer ImagingR01CA166171 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI VAN ZIJL, PETER CM, ZHOU, JINYUAN · 2013 to 2017
$2.4M
Molecular MRI of Radiation Necrosis in Preclinical ModelsR21EB015555 · NIBIB · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI ZHOU, JINYUAN · 2012 to 2013
$447k
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA166171NIBIB NIH HHS P41 EB015909NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB009731NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB015032NIBIB NIH HHS R21 EB015555
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess amide proton transfer-weighted (APTW) imaging features in patients with malignant gliomas after chemoradiation and the diagnostic performance of APT imaging for distinguishing true progression from pseudoprogression. MATERIALS AND

methodsAfter approval by the Institutional Review Board, 32 patients with clinically suspected tumor progression in the first 3 months after chemoradiation were enrolled and scanned at 3T. Longitudinal routine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) changes and medical records were assessed to confirm true progression versus pseudoprogression. True progression was defined as lesions progressing on serial imaging over 6 months, and pseudoprogression was defined as lesions stabilizing or regressing without intervention. The APTWmean and APTWmax signals were obtained from three to five regions of interests for each patient and compared between the true progression and pseudoprogression groups. The diagnostic performance was assessed with receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.

resultsThe true progression was associated with APTW hyperintensity (APTWmean  = 2.75% ± 0.42%), while pseudoprogression was associated with APTW isointensity to mild hyperintensity (APTWmean  = 1.56% ± 0.42%). The APTW signal intensities were significantly higher in the true progression group (n = 20) than in the pseudoprogression group (P < 0.001; n = 12). The cutoff APTWmean and APTWmax intensity values to distinguish between true progression and pseudoprogression were 2.42% (with a sensitivity of 85.0% and a specificity of 100%) and 2.54% (with a sensitivity of 95.0% and a specificity of 91.7%), respectively.

conclusionThe APTW-MRI signal is a valuable imaging biomarker for distinguishing pseudoprogression from true progression in glioma patients. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2016;44:456-462.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAmidesBrain NeoplasmsDisease ProgressionFemaleGliomaHumansImage EnhancementImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm InvasivenessProtonsReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityAmidesProtonsamide proton transfergliomaMRIpseudoprogressiontreatment effecttrue progression

Identifiers

PMID26788865
PMCPMC4946988
OpenAlexW2337474457

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.