ArticleScientific reports2020
Towards noninvasive estimation of tumour pressure by utilising MR elastography and nonlinear biomechanical models: a simulation and phantom study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Noninvasive 3D mapping of tissue stress using reverberant shear wave.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Tissue Strain Mapping via Magnetic Resonance Elastography Can Be Used to Detect Active Lesion Expansion.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
- Biomechanical Assessment of Liver Integrity: Prospective Evaluation of Mechanical Versus Acoustic MR Elastography.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2025Article
- Mechanobiology of 3D cell confinement and extracellular crowding.Biophysical reviews · 2024Review
- Mechanical models and measurement methods of solid stress in tumors.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2024Review
- Hydraulic conductivity of human cancer tissue: A hybrid study.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2024Article
- Imaging in translational cancer research.Cancer biology & medicine · 2022Review
- Non-Invasive Measurement of the Internal Pressure of a Pressurized Biological Compartment Using Lamb Waves.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2022Article
- A computational model of glioma reveals opposing, stiffness-sensitive effects of leaky vasculature and tumor growth on tissue mechanical stress and porosity.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2021Article
- Article
- Insights Into Unveiling a Potential Role of Tertiary Lymphoid Structures in Metastasis.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2021Review
- Article
- The Mechanical Microenvironment in Breast Cancer.Cancers · 2020Review
- Using imaging modalities to predict nanoparticle distribution and treatment efficacy in solid tumors: The growing role of ultrasound.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The solid and fluid pressures of tumours are often elevated relative to surrounding tissue. This increased pressure is known to correlate with decreased treatment efficacy and potentially with tumour aggressiveness and therefore, accurate noninvasive estimates of tumour pressure would be of great value. We present a proof-of-concept method to infer the total tumour pressure, that is the sum of the fluid and solid parts, by examining stiffness in the peritumoural tissue with MR elastography and utilising nonlinear biomechanical models. The pressure from the tumour deforms the surrounding tissue leading to changes in stiffness. Understanding and accounting for these biases in stiffness has the potential to enable estimation of total tumour pressure. Simulations are used to validate the method with varying pressure levels, tumour shape, tumour size, and noise levels. Results show excellent matching in low noise cases and still correlate well with higher noise. Percent error remains near or below 10% for higher pressures in all noise level cases. Reconstructed pressures were also calculated from experiments with a catheter balloon embedded in a plastisol phantom at multiple inflation levels. Here the reconstructed pressures generally match the increases in pressure measured during the experiments. Percent errors between average reconstructed and measured pressures at four inflation states are 17.9%, 52%, 23.2%, and 0.9%. Future work will apply this method to in vivo data, potentially providing an important biomarker for cancer diagnosis and treatment.
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.