Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31080095›Full record

Trial reportThe lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology2019

Diagnostic accuracy of whole-body MRI versus standard imaging pathways for metastatic disease in newly diagnosed colorectal cancer: the prospective Streamline C trial.

Stuart A Taylor, Sue Mallett, Sandy Beare, Gauraang Bhatnagar, Dominic Blunt, Peter Boavida, John Bridgewater, Caroline S Clarke, Marian Duggan, Steve Ellis and 30 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. How to Design a Study and Write a Grant in Radiology?The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2025
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

40 authors at 18 institutions in 1 country.

Stuart A TaylorCentre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK. Electronic address: stuart.taylor@ucl.ac.uk.
Sue MallettInstitute of Applied Health Research, NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK.
Sandy BeareCancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK.
Gauraang BhatnagarFrimley Park Hospital, Frimley, UK.
Dominic BluntImaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Peter BoavidaDepartment of Radiology, Homerton Hospital, London, UK.
John BridgewaterUCL Cancer Institute, London, UK.
Caroline S ClarkeResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.
Marian DugganCancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK.
Steve EllisDepartment of Radiology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Robert Glynne-JonesMount Vernon Centre for Cancer Treatment, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, UK.
Vicky GohDepartment of Cancer Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, King's Health Partners, London, UK.
Ashley M GrovesInstitute of Nuclear Medicine, University College London, London, UK.
Ayshea HameeduddinDepartment of Radiology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Sam M JanesLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK; Department of Thoracic Medicine, University College London Hospitals, UK.
Edward W JohnstonCentre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK.
Dow-Mu KohDepartment of Radiology, Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, Surrey, UK.
Anne MilesDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck University of London, London, UK.
Stephen MorrisDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK.
Alison MortonCentre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK.
Neal NavaniLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK; Department of Thoracic Medicine, University College London Hospitals, UK.
John O'DonohueDepartment of Gastroenterology, Lewisham Hospital, London, UK.
Alfred OliverCentre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK.
Anwar R PadhaniPaul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, UK.
Helen PardoeDepartment of Surgery, Homerton Hospital, London, UK.
Uday PatelIntestinal Imaging Centre, St Mark's Hospital, LNWUH NHS Trust, Harrow, UK.
Shonit PunwaniCentre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK.
Laura QuinnInstitute of Applied Health Research, NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK.
Hameed RafieeNorfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, UK.
Krystyna ReczkoCancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK.
Andrea G RockallDepartment of Radiology, Hammersmith Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK; Department of Cancer and Surgery, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Khawaja ShahabuddinDepartment of Radiology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Harbir S SidhuCentre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK.
Jonathan TeagueCancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK.
Mohamed A ThahaBlizard Institute, National Bowel Research Centre, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK; Department of Surgery, Barts Health NHS Trust, The Royal London Hospital, London, UK.
Matthew TrainDepartment of Radiology, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Katherine van ReeImaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Sanjaya WijeyekoonDepartment of Surgery, Homerton Hospital, London, UK.
Steve HalliganCentre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK.
Streamline investigators
University College London · GBHomerton University Hospital · GBBarts Health NHS Trust · GBImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust · GBBirkbeck, University of London · GBCancer Research UK · GBImperial College London · GBMount Vernon Hospital · GBNIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre · GBSt Mark's Hospital · GBFrimley Park Hospital · GBKing's College London · GBMount Vernon Cancer Centre · GBNorfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBRoyal Free London NHS Foundation Trust · GBRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity Hospital Lewisham · GBUniversity of Birmingham · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 16463Department of Health 10/68/01Department of Health EME/13/122/01Department of Health ICA-CDRF-2017-03-053
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhole-body MRI (WB-MRI) could be an alternative to multimodality staging of colorectal cancer, but its diagnostic accuracy, effect on staging times, number of tests needed, cost, and effect on treatment decisions are unknown. We aimed to prospectively compare the diagnostic accuracy and efficiency of WB-MRI-based staging pathways with standard pathways in colorectal cancer.

methodsThe Streamline C trial was a prospective, multicentre trial done in 16 hospitals in England. Eligible patients were 18 years or older, with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer. Exclusion criteria were severe systemic disease, pregnancy, contraindications to MRI, or polyp cancer. Patients underwent WB-MRI, the result of which was withheld until standard staging investigations were complete and the first treatment decision made. The multidisciplinary team recorded its treatment decision based on standard investigations, then on the WB-MRI staging pathway (WB-MRI plus additional tests generated), and finally on all tests. The primary outcome was difference in per-patient sensitivity for metastases between standard and WB-MRI staging pathways against a consensus reference standard at 12 months, in the per-protocol population. Secondary outcomes were difference in per-patient specificity for metastatic disease detection between standard and WB-MRI staging pathways, differences in treatment decisions, staging efficiency (time taken, test number, and costs), and per-organ sensitivity and specificity for metastases and per-patient agreement for local T and N stage. This trial is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial registry, number ISRCTN43958015, and is complete.

findingsBetween March 26, 2013, and Aug 19, 2016, 1020 patients were screened for eligibility. 370 patients were recruited, 299 of whom completed the trial; 68 (23%) had metastasis at baseline. Pathway sensitivity was 67% (95% CI 56 to 78) for WB-MRI and 63% (51 to 74) for standard pathways, a difference in sensitivity of 4% (-5 to 13, p=0·51). No adverse events related to imaging were reported. Specificity did not differ between WB-MRI (95% [95% CI 92-97]) and standard pathways (93% [90-96], p=0·48). Agreement with the multidisciplinary team's final treatment decision was 96% for WB-MRI and 95% for the standard pathway. Time to complete staging was shorter for WB-MRI (median, 8 days [IQR 6-9]) than for the standard pathway (13 days [11-15]); a 5-day (3-7) difference. WB-MRI required fewer tests (median, one [95% CI 1 to 1]) than did standard pathways (two [2 to 2]), a difference of one (1 to 1). Mean per-patient staging costs were £216 (95% CI 211-221) for WB-MRI and £285 (260-310) for standard pathways.

interpretationWB-MRI staging pathways have similar accuracy to standard pathways and reduce the number of tests needed, staging time, and cost.

fundingUK National Institute for Health Research.

Indexed as

AgedColorectal NeoplasmsCritical PathwaysFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasm StagingProspective StudiesReference StandardsSensitivity and SpecificityWhole Body Imaging

Identifiers

PMID31080095
PMCPMC6547166
OpenAlexW2944114912

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.