ArticleEuropean radiology2019
High-grade soft-tissue sarcoma: optimizing injection improves MRI evaluation of tumor response.
Article in European radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing Treatment Response in Soft Tissue Sarcoma Using Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI: A Systematic Review.Korean journal of radiology · 2026Pooled it
- TThe Iowa orthopaedic journal · 2023Article
- Predicting Soft Tissue Sarcoma Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Using an MRI-Based Delta-Radiomics Approach.Molecular imaging and biology · 2023Article
- Radiomics of Musculoskeletal Sarcomas: A Narrative Review.Journal of imaging · 2022Review
- Magnetic resonance imaging assessment of chemotherapy-related adipocytic maturation in myxoid/round cell liposarcomas: specificity and prognostic value.The British journal of radiology · 2020Article
- Can radiomics improve the prediction of metastatic relapse of myxoid/round cell liposarcomas?European radiology · 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
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine the acquisition delay after gadolinium-chelate injection that optimizes the prediction of the histological response during anthracycline-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for locally advanced high-grade soft-tissue sarcomas (STS).
methodsThirty patients (mean age 62 years) were included in this IRB-approved study. All patients received 5-6 cycles of NAC followed by surgery. A good response was defined as ≤ 10% viable cells on histological analysis of the surgical specimen. DCE-MRI was performed before treatment (MRI
resultsThere were 22 (73.3%) poor responders. Acquisition delay had a significant effect on change in CE and on the response status according to Choi (p = 0.0014 and 0.0270, respectively). The highest AUROC was obtained at t = 58 s (0.792) with an optimal threshold of a -30.5% decrease in CE. At t = 58 s, accuracy to predict a poor response was 82.8% above this threshold, while it was 72.4% and 70% with no objective response according to the Choi criteria and RECIST1.1, respectively.
conclusionOptimization of acquisition delay after injection to estimate change in CE improves the prediction of histological response. For STS undergoing NAC, a 60-s delay can be recommended with MRI. KEY POINTS: • Accuracy of response criteria based on contrast enhancement, like the Choi criteria, is dependent on the acquisition delay after gadolinium-chelate injection. • DCE-MRI helps determine the optimal acquisition delay after gadolinium-chelate injection for improving evaluation of tumor response. • In soft tissue sarcoma, an acquisition delay at 60 s optimizes the evaluation of the response and accuracy of the Choi criteria.
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.