Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26999488›Full record

ArticleAJR. American journal of roentgenology2016

Use of Quantitative Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound to Assess Response to Antiangiogenic Therapy in Children and Adolescents With Solid Malignancies: A Pilot Study.

M Beth McCarville, Jamie L Coleman, Junyu Guo, Yimei Li, Xingyu Li, Patricia J Honnoll, Andrew M Davidoff, Fariba Navid

Open access · greenAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase I
In one paragraph

Article in AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Microvascular Ultrasound Imaging in the Neonatal Brain: From Advanced Doppler to Super-Resolution.IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control · 2025
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

M Beth McCarville1 Department of Diagnostic Imaging (MS 220), St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, 262 Danny Thomas Pl, Memphis, TN 38105.
Jamie L Coleman1 Department of Diagnostic Imaging (MS 220), St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, 262 Danny Thomas Pl, Memphis, TN 38105.
Junyu Guo1 Department of Diagnostic Imaging (MS 220), St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, 262 Danny Thomas Pl, Memphis, TN 38105.
Yimei Li2 Department of Biostatistics, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN.
Xingyu Li2 Department of Biostatistics, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN.
Patricia J Honnoll1 Department of Diagnostic Imaging (MS 220), St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, 262 Danny Thomas Pl, Memphis, TN 38105.
Andrew M Davidoff3 Department of Surgery, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN.
Fariba Navid4 Department of Oncology, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN.
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital · US

Funding

Viral Vector Technology (VVTSR)P30CA021765 · NCI · ST. JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL · PI CHARLES ROBERTS · 1985 to 2026
$166.9M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA021765
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe purpose of this study was to investigate contrast-enhanced ultrasound assessment of tumor response to antiangiogenic therapy in children and adolescents with solid malignancies. SUBJECTS AND

methodsChildren with recurrent solid tumors who were enrolled in an institutional phase 1 study of antiangiogenic therapy underwent contrast-enhanced ultrasound of target lesions before therapy, on therapy days 3 and 7, and at the end of course 1. Acoustic data from target lesion ROIs were used to measure peak enhancement, time to peak, rate of enhancement, total AUC, AUC during wash-in (AUC1), and AUC during washout (AUC2). The Cox regression model was used to assess the association between changes in parameters from baseline to follow-up time points and time to tumor progression. Values of p ≤ 0.050 were considered significant.

resultsTarget lesion sites included liver (n = 3), pleura (n = 2), and supraclavicular mass, soft-tissue component of bone metastasis, lung, retroperitoneum, peritoneum, lymph node, muscle mass, and perineum (n = 1 each). Hazard ratios for changes from baseline to end of course 1 for peak enhancement (1.17, p = 0.034), rate of enhancement (3.25, p = 0.029), and AUC1 (1.02, p = 0.040) were significantly associated with time to progression. Greater decreases in these parameters correlated with longer time to progression.

conclusionContrast-enhanced ultrasound measurements of tumor peak enhancement, rate of enhancement, and AUC1 were early predictors of time to progression in a cohort of children and adolescents with recurrent solid tumors treated with antiangiogenic therapy. Further investigation of these findings in a larger population is warranted.

Indexed as

AdolescentAngiogenesis InhibitorsChildChild, PreschoolContrast MediaFemaleHumansInfantMaleNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasmsPilot ProjectsRemission InductionUltrasonographyYoung AdultAngiogenesis InhibitorsContrast Mediaantiangiogeniccontrast-enhanced ultrasoundpediatrictumor response

Identifiers

PMID26999488
PMCPMC5153883
OpenAlexW2309322354

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.