ReviewDer Radiologe2019
Imaging of rectal cancer.
Review in Der Radiologe, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Clinical translation of a DWI-radiomics nomogram integrating serum biomarkers for pretreatment staging of cervical cancer.BMC medical imaging · 2026Article
- Preoperative prediction of lymphovascular invasion and T-staging of rectal cancer via a dual-energy computed tomography iodine map: a feasibility study.Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2025Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging-based radiomics in predicting the expression of Ki-67, p53, and epidermal growth factor receptor in rectal cancer.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- Review
- Diagnostic advantages of transrectal ultrasound with gastrointestinal agent instillation for rectal adenoma and early-stage rectal cancer: comparison of conventional transrectal ultrasound techniques.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- Progress in the diagnosis of lymph node metastasis in rectal cancer: a review.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- How We Treat Localized Rectal Cancer-An Institutional Paradigm for Total Neoadjuvant Therapy.Cancers · 2022Review
- Influence of incorrect staging of colorectal carcinoma on oncological outcome: are we playing safely?Updates in surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
International guidelines dictate that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) should be part of the primary standard work up of patients with rectal cancer because MRI can accurately identify the main risk factors for local recurrence and stratify patients into a differentiated treatment. The role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is restricted to staging of superficial tumors because EUS is able to differentiate between T1 and T2 rectal cancer. Recent guidelines recommend the addition of diffusion-weighted (DWI) MRI to clinical and endoscopic assessment of response to preoperative radiochemotherapy (RCT). MRI is able to identify significant tumor regression which may alter the surgical approach.
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.