Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27461395›Full record

ArticlePhysics in medicine and biology2016

A longitudinal magnetic resonance elastography study of murine brain tumors following radiation therapy.

Y Feng, E H Clayton, R J Okamoto, J Engelbach, P V Bayly, J R Garbow

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physics in medicine and biology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Frontiers in oncology · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. REVIEW: MR elastography of brain tumors.NeuroImage. Clinical · 2020
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Pre-clinical MR elastography: Principles, techniques, and applications.Journal of magnetic resonance (San Diego, Calif. : 1997) · 2018
    Review
  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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Y FengSchool of Mechanical and Electronic Engineering, Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu, People's Republic of China.
E H ClaytonDepartment of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA.
R J OkamotoDepartment of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA.
J EngelbachDepartment of Radiology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA.
P V BaylyDepartment of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA.
J R GarbowDepartment of Radiology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Washington University in St. Louis · USAlvin J. Siteman Cancer CenterNeurological Surgery · USSoochow University · CN

Funding

Washington University Center for Cellular ImagingP30CA091842 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI TIMOTHY J. EBERLEIN · 2001 to 2026
$128.0M
IMAGING BIOMARKERS FOR RADIATION-INDUCED NECROSISR01CA155365 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI GARBOW, JOEL RICHARD · 2011 to 2015
$1.5M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA091842NCI NIH HHS R01 CA155365
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An accurate and noninvasive method for assessing treatment response following radiotherapy is needed for both treatment monitoring and planning. Measurement of solid tumor volume alone is not sufficient for reliable early detection of therapeutic response, since changes in physiological and/or biomechanical properties can precede tumor volume change following therapy. In this study, we use magnetic resonance elastography to evaluate the treatment effect after radiotherapy in a murine brain tumor model. Shear modulus was calculated and compared between the delineated tumor region of interest (ROI) and its contralateral, mirrored counterpart. We also compared the shear modulus from both the irradiated and non-irradiated tumor and mirror ROIs longitudinally, sampling four time points spanning 9-19 d post tumor implant. Results showed that the tumor ROI had a lower shear modulus than that of the mirror ROI, independent of radiation. The shear modulus of the tumor ROI decreased over time for both the treated and untreated groups. By contrast, the shear modulus of the mirror ROI appeared to be relatively constant for the treated group, while an increasing trend was observed for the untreated group. The results provide insights into the tumor properties after radiation treatment and demonstrate the potential of using the mechanical properties of the tumor as a biomarker. In future studies, more closely spaced time points will be employed for detailed analysis of the radiation effect.

Indexed as

AnimalsBrain NeoplasmsElasticity Imaging TechniquesFemaleGlioblastomaImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMiceMice, Inbred BALB CTumor Burden

Identifiers

PMID27461395
PMCPMC5943702
OpenAlexW2498259076

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.