ArticleOncotarget2017
Contrast-enhanced ultrasound evaluation of pancreatic cancer xenografts in nude mice after irradiation with sub-threshold focused ultrasound for tumor ablation.
Article in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- In Vivo Flow Cytometric Evaluation of Circulating Metastatic Pancreatic Tumor Cells after High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Therapy.Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology · 2020Article
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
We evaluated the efficacy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for assessing tumors after irradiation with sub-threshold focused ultrasound (FUS) ablation in pancreatic cancer xenografts in nude mice. Thirty tumor-bearing nude mice were divided into three groups: Group A received sham irradiation, Group B received a moderate-acoustic energy dose (sub-threshold), and Group C received a high-acoustic energy dose. In Group B, B-mode ultrasound (US), color Doppler US, and dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound (DCE-US) studies were conducted before and after irradiation. After irradiation, tumor growth was inhibited in Group B, and the tumors shrank in Group C. In Group A, the tumor sizes were unchanged. In Group B, contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) images showed a rapid rush of contrast agent into and out of tumors before irradiation. After irradiation, CEUS revealed contrast agent perfusion only at the tumor periphery and irregular, un-perfused volumes of contrast agent within the tumors. DCE-US perfusion parameters, including peak intensity (PI) and area under the curve (AUC), had decreased 24 hours after irradiation. PI and AUC were increased 48 hours and 2weeks after irradiation. Time to peak (TP) and sharpness were increased 24 hours after irradiation. TP decreased at 48 hours and 2 weeks after irradiation. CEUS is thus an effective method for early evaluation after irradiation with sub-threshold FUS.
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.