Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30888482›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2019

Usefulness of the inchworm sign on DWI for predicting pT1 bladder cancer progression.

Shugo Yajima, Soichiro Yoshida, Taro Takahara, Yuki Arita, Hiroshi Tanaka, Yuma Waseda, Minato Yokoyama, Junichiro Ishioka, Yoh Matsuoka, Kazutaka Saito and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Shugo YajimaDepartment of Urology, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo, 113-8510, Japan.
Soichiro YoshidaDepartment of Urology, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo, 113-8510, Japan. s-yoshida.uro@tmd.ac.jp.
Taro TakaharaDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Tokai University School of Engineering, Isehara, Japan.
Yuki AritaDepartment of Radiology, Advanced Imaging Center, Yaesu Clinic, Tokyo, Japan.
Hiroshi TanakaDepartment of Radiology, Ochanomizu Surugadai Clinic, Tokyo, Japan.
Yuma WasedaDepartment of Urology, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo, 113-8510, Japan.
Minato YokoyamaDepartment of Urology, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo, 113-8510, Japan.
Junichiro IshiokaDepartment of Urology, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo, 113-8510, Japan.
Yoh MatsuokaDepartment of Urology, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo, 113-8510, Japan.
Kazutaka SaitoDepartment of Urology, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo, 113-8510, Japan.
Kazunori KiharaDepartment of Urology, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo, 113-8510, Japan.
Yasuhisa FujiiDepartment of Urology, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo, 113-8510, Japan.
Tokyo Medical and Dental University · JPOchanomizu University · JPTokai University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the significance of the presence or absence of an "inchworm sign" on DWI for the recurrence and progression of T1 bladder cancer. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 91 patients with pT1 urothelial carcinoma who underwent DWI prior to transurethral resection between 2007 and 2016. DWI of the dominant tumors was scrutinized for inchworm signs at b = 1000 s/mm

resultsAn inchworm sign was seen in 65 cases (71%), while it was absent in 26 cases. Among the 65, 25 (38%) had confirmed tumor recurrence, while in the remaining 26, 14 (54%) had confirmed recurrence (median time post TURB = 7.9 and 10.1 months for each). At the time of recurrence, the tumor had progressed in one (2%) inchworm-sign-positive and seven (27%) inchworm-sign-negative cases. The progression rate of inchworm-sign-negative cases was significantly higher than that of inchworm-sign-positive cases (hazard ratio = 17.2, p = 0.0017), whereas there was no significant difference in the recurrence rate between two groups. The absence of an inchworm sign and histological grade 3 were independent risk factors for progression (p < 0.001 and 0.010, respectively).

conclusionsThe absence of an inchworm sign on DWI was a significant prognostic factor for progression of T1 bladder cancer. Morphological evaluation of DWI signals may therefore be a useful adjunct to preoperative assessment of biological aggressiveness. KEY POINTS: • An inchworm sign is a simple diagnostic criterion that characterizes only the shape of the tumor signal on DWI, and potentially serves as an imaging biomarker to predict clinical aggressiveness. • The absence of an inchworm sign on DWI is a significant indicator of progression of T1 bladder cancer.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overDisease ProgressionFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm StagingPredictive Value of TestsProportional Hazards ModelsRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsBiomarkersDiffusion magnetic resonance imagingMagnetic resonance imagingPrognosisUrinary bladder neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID30888482
OpenAlexW2925144679

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.