SynthesisNeuroradiology2019
Differentiation of lymphomatous, metastatic, and non-malignant lymphadenopathy in the neck with quantitative diffusion-weighted imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Neuroradiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Apparent diffusion coefficient cannot discriminate metastatic and non-metastatic lymph nodes in rectal cancer: a meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Pooled it
- Multiparametric MRI Assessment of Cervical Lymphadenopathy: Combined Diagnostic Performance of Morphological Features and Apparent Diffusion Coefficient.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Differentiating lymph node status in malignant melanoma: the role of apparent diffusion coefficient ratio in diffusion-weighted MRI - a prospective diagnostic study.BMC medical imaging · 2026Article
- Automated Lymph Node Localization and Segmentation in Patients with Head and Neck Cancer: Opportunities and Limitations of Using a Generic AI Model.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Presepsin Outperforms Conventional Inflammatory Markers in Distinguishing Malignant from Benign Cervical Lymphadenopathy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Solitary large malignant lymphoma in the head and neck region.Molecular and clinical oncology · 2024Article
- Review
- Differentiating nasopharyngeal carcinoma from lymphoma in the head and neck region using the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Polish journal of radiology · 2023Review
- Diffusion-weighted imaging and apparent diffusion coefficient mapping of head and neck lymph node metastasis: a systematic review.Exploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy · 2022Review
- Multi-parametric arterial spin labeling and diffusion-weighted imaging in differentiation of metastatic from reactive lymph nodes in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2021Article
- Applications of radiomics in precision diagnosis, prognostication and treatment planning of head and neck squamous cell carcinomas.Cancers of the head & neck · 2020Review
- Texture Analysis of Multi-Shot Echo-planar Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: The Diagnostic Value for Nodal Metastasis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of literature comparing average apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) for differentiating lymphomatous, metastatic, and non-malignant cervical lymphadenopathy.
methodsWe performed a comprehensive literature search of Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science Core Collection. Studies comparing average ADC of lymphomatous, metastatic, and non-malignant neck lymph nodes were included. The standardized mean difference and 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated using random-effects models. In subgroup analysis of those studies applying ADC threshold for differentiation of cervical lymphadenopathy, pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and summary receiver operating characteristics (sROC) area under the curve (AUC) were determined.
resultsA total of 27 studies with 1165 patients were included, pooling data from 225 lymphomatous, 1162 metastatic, and 1333 non-malignant cervical lymph nodes. The average ADC values were lower in lymphomatous compared to metastatic nodes, and in metastatic compared to non-malignant nodes with a standardized mean difference of - 1.36 (95% CI: - 1.71 to - 1.01, p < 0.0001) and - 1.61 (95% CI: - 2.19 to - 1.04, p < 0.0001), respectively. In subgroup analysis, applying ADC threshold could differentiate lymphomatous from metastatic lymphadenopathy with DOR of 52.07 (95% CI 25.45-106.54) and sROC AUC of 0.936 (95% CI 0.896-0.979) and differentiate metastatic from non-malignant nodes with DOR of 39.45 (95% CI 16.92-92.18) and sROC AUC of 0.929 (95% CI 0.873-0.966).
conclusionsQuantitative assessment of ADC can help with differentiation of suspicious cervical lymph nodes, particularly in those patients without prior history of malignancy or unknown primary cancer site.
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.