Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29731887›Full record

ArticleOncology letters2018

Texture analysis of diffusion weighted imaging for the evaluation of glioma heterogeneity based on different regions of interest.

Shan Wang, Meng Meng, Xue Zhang, Chen Wu, Ru Wang, Jiangfen Wu, Muhammad Umair Sami, Kai Xu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncology letters, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Radiomic analysis of magnetic resonance fingerprinting in adult brain tumors.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2021
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. 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

8 authors.

Shan WangSchool of Medical Imaging, Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu 221004, P.R. China.
Meng MengSchool of Medical Imaging, Guizhou Medical University, Guiyang, Guizhou 550004, P.R. China.
Xue ZhangSchool of Medical Imaging, Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu 221004, P.R. China.
Chen WuSchool of Medical Imaging, Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu 221004, P.R. China.
Ru WangSchool of Medical Imaging, Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu 221004, P.R. China.
Jiangfen WuGE Healthcare (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., Shanghai 201203, P.R. China.
Muhammad Umair SamiSchool of Medical Imaging, Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu 221004, P.R. China.
Kai XuSchool of Medical Imaging, Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu 221004, P.R. China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study aimed to explore the role of texture analysis with apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps based on different regions of interest (ROI) in determining glioma grade. Thirty patients with glioma underwent diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI). ADC values were determined from the following three ROIs: i) whole tumor; ii) solid portion; and iii) peritumoral edema. Texture features were compared between high-grade gliomas (HGGs) and low-grade gliomas (LGGs) using the non-parametric Wilcoxon rank-sum test or the unpaired Student's t-test. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed to determine the optimum threshold for inhomogeneity values in discrimination of HGGs from LGGs. With a spearman rank correlation model, the aforementioned ADC inhomogeneity values were correlated with the Ki-67 labeling index. With whole tumor ROI, inhomogeneity values proved to be significantly different between HGGs and LGGs (P<0.001). With solid portion ROI, inhomogeneity and median values showed significant difference between HGGs and LGGs (P=0.001 and P=0.043, respectively). With peritumoral edema ROI, entropy and edema volume demonstrated positive results (P=0.016, P<0.001). The whole tumor inhomogeneity parameter performed with better diagnostic accuracy (P=0.048) than selecting the solid portion ROI. The association between inhomogeneity and Ki-67 labeling index was significantly positive in whole tumor and solid portion ROI (R=0.628, P<0.001 and R=0.470, P=0.009). Texture analysis of DWI based on different ROI can provide various significant parameters to evaluate tumor heterogeneity, which were correlated with tumor grade. Particularly, the inhomogeneity value derived from whole tumor ROI provided high diagnostic value and predicting the status of tumor proliferation.

Indexed as

diffusion-weighted imaginggliomagradingregion of interesttexture analysis

Identifiers

PMID29731887
PMCPMC5921227

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.