Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29656321›Full record

Trial reportNeuroradiology2018

Multi-center reproducibility of structural, diffusion tensor, and resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging measures.

S Deprez, Michiel B de Ruiter, S Bogaert, R Peeters, J Belderbos, D De Ruysscher, S Schagen, S Sunaert, P Pullens, E Achten

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIComparative StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Neuroradiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

S DeprezDepartment of Radiology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Michiel B de RuiterDivision of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. m.d.ruiter@nki.nl.
S BogaertDepartment of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
R PeetersDepartment of Radiology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
J BelderbosDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
D De RuysscherDepartment of Radiation Oncology (Maastro clinic), GROW School, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
S SchagenDivision of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
S SunaertDepartment of Radiology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
P PullensDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital Antwerp & Antwerp University, Edegem, Belgium.
E AchtenDepartment of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
KU Leuven · BEThe Netherlands Cancer Institute · NLGhent University Hospital · BEAntwerp University Hospital · BEMaastricht University · NL

Funding

Institute for the Promotion of Innovation by Science and Technology (Flanders) IWT 130262
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of this study is to assess multi-center reproducibility and longitudinal consistency of MRI imaging measurements, as part of a phase III longitudinal multi-center study comparing the neurotoxic effect following prophylactic cranial irradiation with hippocampal avoidance (HA-PCI), in comparison with conventional PCI in patients with small-cell lung cancer.

methodsHarmonized MRI acquisition protocols from six participating sites and two different vendors were compared using both physical and human phantoms. We assessed variability across sites and time points by evaluating various phantoms and data including hippocampal volume, diffusion metrics, and resting-state fMRI, from two healthy volunteers.

resultsWe report average coefficients of variation (CV) below 5% for intrascanner, intravendor, and intervendor reproducibility for both structural and diffusion imaging metrics, except for diffusion metrics obtained from tractography with average CVs ranging up to 7.8%. Additionally, resting-state fMRI showed stable temporal SNR and reliable generation of subjects DMN across vendors and time points.

conclusionThese findings indicate that the presented multi-site MRI acquisition protocol can be used in a longitudinal study design and that pooling of the acquired data as part of the phase III longitudinal HA-PCI project is possible with careful monitoring of the results of the half-yearly QA assessment to follow-up on potential scanner-related longitudinal changes in image quality.

Indexed as

Cranial IrradiationAdultAnisotropyDiffusion Tensor ImagingFemaleHealthy VolunteersHippocampusHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedImaging, Three-DimensionalLongitudinal StudiesLung NeoplasmsMagnetic Resonance ImagingMalePhantoms, ImagingReproducibility of ResultsDiffusion tensor imagingMulti-centerReproducibilityResting state fMRIStructural MRI

Identifiers

PMID29656321
OpenAlexW2797406252

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.