ReviewDer Radiologe2016
[Ductal adenocarcinoma and unusual differential diagnosis].
Review in Der Radiologe, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ductal pancreatic adenocarcinoma is by far the most common solid tumor of the pancreas. It has a very poor prognosis, especially in the more advanced stages which are no longer locally confined. Due to mostly unspecific symptoms, imaging is key in the diagnostic process. Because of the widespread use of imaging techniques, incidental findings are to a greater extent discovered in the pancreas, which subsequently entail further work-up. Ductal pancreatic adenocarcinoma can be mimicked by a large number of different lesions, such as anatomical variants, peripancreatic structures and tumors, rarer primary solid pancreatic tumors, cystic tumors, metastases or different variants of pancreatitis. Additionally, a number of precursor lesions can be differentiated. The correct classification is thus important as an early diagnosis of ductal pancreatic adenocarcinoma is relevant for the prognosis and because the possibly avoidable treatment is very invasive. All major imaging techniques are principally suitable for pancreatic imaging. In addition to sonography of the abdomen, usually the baseline diagnostic tool, computed tomography (CT) with its superior spatial resolution, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with its good soft tissue differentiation capabilities, possibly in combination with MR cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), endosonography with its extraordinary spatial resolution, conceivably with additional endoscopic retrograde CP or the option of direct biopsy and finally positron emission tomography CT (PET-CT) as a molecular imaging tool are all particularly useful modalities. The various techniques all have its advantages and disadvantages; depending on the individual situation they may need to be combined.
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.