ArticleDento maxillo facial radiology2016
Quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MRI for differentiation between nasopharyngeal carcinoma and lymphoma at the primary site.
Article in Dento maxillo facial radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Value of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in distinguishing sinonasal lymphoma from sinonasal carcinoma: a case control study.BMC medical imaging · 2024Article
- Synthetic MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging for differentiating nasopharyngeal lymphoma from nasopharyngeal carcinoma: combination with morphological features.The British journal of radiology · 2024Article
- Artificial intelligence for diagnosis and prognosis prediction of natural killer/T cell lymphoma using magnetic resonance imaging.Cell reports. Medicine · 2024Article
- Differentiating nasopharyngeal carcinoma from lymphoma in the head and neck region using the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Polish journal of radiology · 2023Review
- Value of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Histogram Analysis in the Differential Diagnosis of Nasopharyngeal Lymphoma and Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Based on Readout-Segmented Diffusion-Weighted Imaging.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Differentiation between nasopharyngeal carcinoma and lymphoma at the primary site using whole-tumor histogram analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient maps.La Radiologia medica · 2020Article
- Quantitative Analysis of DCE-MRI and RESOLVE-DWI for Differentiating Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma from Nasopharyngeal Lymphoid Hyperplasia.Journal of medical systems · 2020Article
- Distinguishing early-stage nasopharyngeal carcinoma from benign hyperplasia using intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion-weighted MRI.European radiology · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the value of quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (QDCE-MRI) and diffusion-weighted MRI (DW-MRI) in differentiating nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) from lymphoma.
methodsWe retrospectively analysed the data from 102 patients (82 with NPC and 20 with lymphoma) who underwent pre-treatment QDCE-MRI and DW-MRI on a 1.5-T MR unit. QDEC-MRI parameters [influx transfer constant (K(trans)), efflux rate constant (Kep), fractional volume of extravascular extracellular space (Ve) and fractional volume of plasma (fPV)] based on pharmacokinetic model and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) were compared between the two nasopharyngeal malignancies.
resultsThe K(trans), Kep, Ve, fPV and ADC values (mean ± standard deviation) for NPC were 0.366 ± 0.155 min(-1), 1.353 ± 0.468 min(-1), 0.292 ± 0.117, 0.027 ± 0.024 and 0.981 ± 0.184 × 10(-3) mm(2) s(-1), respectively. The K(trans), Kep, Ve, fPV and ADC values (mean ± standard deviation) for lymphoma were 0.212 ± 0.059 min(-1), 1.073 ± 0.238 min(-1), 0.213 ± 0.104, 0.008 ± 0.007 and 0.760 ± 0.182 × 10(-3) mm(2) s(-1), respectively. Optimal cut-off values (area under the curve, sensitivity, specificity) for distinguishing the two tumours were as follows: K(trans) = 0.262 min(-1) (0.866, 80.49%, 85.00%), Kep = 1.401 min(-1) (0.681, 43.90%, 100.00%), Ve = 0.211 (0.784, 76.83%, 85.00%), fPV = 0.012 (0.779, 60.98%, 85.00%), ADC = 0.761 × 10(-3) mm(2) s(-1) (0.781, 93.90%, 55.00%).
conclusionsQDCE-MRI together with DW-MRI is useful for differentiation between NPC and lymphoma.
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.