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.
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.
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
43 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.
- ESR Essentials: bone marrow MRI in oncology-practice recommendations by the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology.European radiology · 2026Guideline
- Whole-Body MRI Is an Effective Imaging Modality for Hematological Malignancy Treatment Response Assessment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Whole-body MRI compared with standard pathways for staging metastatic disease in lung and colorectal cancer: the Streamline diagnostic accuracy studies.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2019Trial
- Diagnostic accuracy of whole-body MRI versus standard imaging pathways for metastatic disease in newly diagnosed non-small-cell lung cancer: the prospective Streamline L trial.The Lancet. Respiratory medicine · 2019Trial
- Bibliometric Analysis of Whole-Body MRI from 2015 to 2025 Across Clinical Applications, Quantitative Imaging, and Artificial Intelligence.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- U-Swing: An Adaptive U-Net and Swin Fusion for WB-MRI Whole Spine Bone Marrow Segmentation.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Performance of simulated abbreviated liver MRI combined with CT for liver metastasis screening in rectal cancer staging.European radiology · 2026Article
- Automated Field of View Prescription for Whole-body Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using Deep Learning Based Body Region Segmentations.Investigative radiology · 2025Article
- Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging for cutaneous melanoma staging: A scientific review.World journal of clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Advancing Esophageal Cancer Staging and Restaging: The Role of MRI in Precision Diagnosis.Cancers · 2025Review
- Diagnostic Certainty in Characterizing Liver Lesions in Rectal Cancer: Abbreviated Liver MRI versus CT.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging provides accurate staging of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, but is less preferred by patients.World journal of radiology · 2025Article
- How to Design a Study and Write a Grant in Radiology?The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2025Article
- Whole-body MRI in oncology: acquisition protocols, current guidelines, and beyond.La Radiologia medica · 2024Review
- Present and future of whole-body MRI in metastatic disease and myeloma: how and why you will do it.Skeletal radiology · 2024Review
- Article
- Imaging in the era of risk-adapted treatment in colon cancer.The British journal of radiology · 2024Review
- Multimodality Imaging to Direct Management of Primary and Recurrent Rectal Adenocarcinoma Beyond the Total Mesorectal Excision Plane.Radiology. Imaging cancer · 2024Review
- Image quality in whole-body MRI using the MY-RADS protocol in a prospective multi-centre multiple myeloma study.Insights into imaging · 2023Article
- From Pixels to Pathology: Employing Computer Vision to Decode Chest Diseases in Medical Images.Cureus · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
40 authors at 18 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
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
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.