ArticleJapanese journal of radiology2018
DCE-MRI time-intensity curve visual inspection to assess pathological response after neoadjuvant therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer.
Article in Japanese journal of radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- The predictive value of multi-phase contrast-enhanced MRI for pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- The value of diffusion-weighted imaging and semi-quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in predicting the efficacy of medroxyprogesterone acetate treatment for atypical endometrial hyperplasia and endometrial carcinoma.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- Personalized prediction of pathological complete response in breast cancer neoadjuvant therapy: a nomogram combining quantitative MRI biomarkers and molecular subtypes.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Treatments and cancer: implications for radiologists.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Diagnostic performance of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging parameters and serum tumor markers in rectal carcinoma prognosis.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for evaluating early response to radiosurgery in patients with vestibular schwannoma.Japanese journal of radiology · 2022Article
- Diffusion weighted imaging and diffusion kurtosis imaging in abdominal oncological setting: why and when.Infectious agents and cancer · 2022Review
- Lymph Nodes Evaluation in Rectal Cancer: Where Do We Stand and Future Perspective.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) imaging: state of the art and applications in whole-body imaging.Japanese journal of radiology · 2022Review
- Article
- Quantitative pharmacokinetic analysis of high-temporal-resolution dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI to differentiate the normal-appearing pituitary gland from pituitary macroadenoma.Japanese journal of 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the potential of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) to discriminate responder from non-responder patients after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (pCRT) in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). MATERIALS AND
methodsOne hundred and fifty-eight consecutive patients were enrolled in this prospective study. We compared morphological MRI (mMRI) using T2-weighted images about tumor presence and invasiveness, and functional DCE-MRI using time-intensity curve (TIC) visual inspection (qMRI), classifying TIC shape into three types: type 1, persistent enhancement; type 2, high enhancement with plateau; type 3, high enhancement with wash-out. Clinical TNM was obtained before and after CRT by radiological consensus of two expert radiologists. Pathological tumor-nodes-metastasis classification and tumor regression grade (TRG) were confirmed as the golden standard. Non-parametric test, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated.
resultsNinety-eight patients (62%) were classified as responders (TRG ≤ 2), while 60 (38%) were classified as non-responders. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 52, 78, and 62% for mMRI, and 81, 85, and 82% for qMRI, respectively.
conclusionsTIC visual inspection may be one of the potential biomarkers over morphological analysis using DCE-MRI data to assess pathological response after pCRT in LARC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30039258What 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.