ArticleTomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.)2019
Evaluating Multisite rCBV Consistency from DSC-MRI Imaging Protocols and Postprocessing Software Across the NCI Quantitative Imaging Network Sites Using a Digital Reference Object (DRO).
Article in Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances in Glioblastoma Diagnosis: Integrating Genetics, Noninvasive Sampling, and Advanced Imaging.Cancers · 2025Review
- Quantitative non-contrast perfusion MRI in the body using arterial spin labeling.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Review
- A community-endorsed open-source lexicon for contrast agent-based perfusion MRI: A consensus guidelines report from the ISMRM Open Science Initiative for Perfusion Imaging (OSIPI).Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2024Article
- Systematic evaluation of MRI-based characterization of tumor-associated vascular morphology and hemodynamics via a dynamic digital phantom.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2024Article
- Integrated molecular and multiparametric MRI mapping of high-grade glioma identifies regional biologic signatures.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Advanced pediatric neuroimaging.Pediatric radiology · 2023Review
- Advanced MRI Protocols to Discriminate Glioma From Treatment Effects: State of the Art and Future Directions.Frontiers in radiology · 2022Review
- Evaluation of single bolus, dual-echo dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI protocols in brain tumor patients.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2021Article
- Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging and tumor forecasting of breast cancer patients in the community setting.Nature protocols · 2021Review
- An in silico validation framework for quantitative DCE-MRI techniques based on a dynamic digital phantom.Medical image analysis · 2021Article
- MRI biomarkers in neuro-oncology.Nature reviews. Neurology · 2021Review
- Imaging for Response Assessment in Cancer Clinical Trials.Seminars in nuclear medicine · 2020Article
- Consensus recommendations for a dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI protocol for use in high-grade gliomas.Neuro-oncology · 2020Article
- Evaluating the Use of rCBV as a Tumor Grade and Treatment Response Classifier Across NCI Quantitative Imaging Network Sites: Part II of the DSC-MRI Digital Reference Object (DRO) Challenge.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2020Article
- Intrasession Reliability of Arterial Spin-Labeled MRI-Measured Noncontrast Perfusion in Glioblastoma at 3 T.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2020Article
- Quantitative Imaging Enters the Clinical Arena: A Personal Viewpoint.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2020Article
- Optimal Control Theory for Personalized Therapeutic Regimens in Oncology: Background, History, Challenges, and Opportunities.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
- Longitudinal, leakage corrected and uncorrected rCBV during the first-line treatment of glioblastoma: a prospective study.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2019Article
- Standard clinical approaches and emerging modalities for glioblastoma imaging.Neuro-oncology advancesReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
28 authors at 14 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV) cannot be used as a response metric in clinical trials, in part, because of variations in biomarker consistency and associated interpretation across sites, stemming from differences in image acquisition and postprocessing methods (PMs). This study leveraged a dynamic susceptibility contrast magnetic resonance imaging digital reference object to characterize rCBV consistency across 12 sites participating in the Quantitative Imaging Network (QIN), specifically focusing on differences in site-specific imaging protocols (IPs; n = 17), and PMs (n = 19) and differences due to site-specific IPs and PMs (n = 25). Thus, high agreement across sites occurs when 1 managing center processes rCBV despite slight variations in the IP. This result is most likely supported by current initiatives to standardize IPs. However, marked intersite disagreement was observed when site-specific software was applied for rCBV measurements. This study's results have important implications for comparing rCBV values across sites and trials, where variability in PMs could confound the comparison of therapeutic effectiveness and/or any attempts to establish thresholds for categorical response to therapy. To overcome these challenges and ensure the successful use of rCBV as a clinical trial biomarker, we recommend the establishment of qualifying and validating site- and trial-specific criteria for scanners and acquisition methods (eg, using a validated phantom) and the software tools used for dynamic susceptibility contrast magnetic resonance imaging analysis (eg, using a digital reference object where the ground truth is known).
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.