Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32410378›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical imaging and radiation oncology2020

Predictors of patient preference for either whole body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) or CT/ PET-CT for staging colorectal or lung cancer.

Anne Miles, Ruth Ec Evans, Steve Halligan, Sandy Beare, John Bridgewater, Vicky Goh, Sam M Janes, Neal Navani, Alfred Oliver, Alison Morton and 4 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Anne MilesDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck, University of London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3122-9900
Ruth Ec EvansDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck, University of London, London, UK.
Steve HalliganCentre for Medical Imaging, University College London, Charles Bell House, UK.
Sandy BeareCancer Research UK, University College London Clinical Trials Centre, London, UK.
John BridgewaterUCL Cancer Institute, Paul O Gorman Building, London, UK.
Vicky GohCancer Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, Strand, London, UK.
Sam M JanesLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, Division of Medicine, University College London, London, UK.
Neal NavaniDepartment of Thoracic Medicine, UCLH and Lungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Alfred OliverCancer patient representatives, c/o National Cancer Research Institute, London, UK.
Alison MortonCancer patient representatives, c/o National Cancer Research Institute, London, UK.
Steve MorrisResearch Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK.
Andrea RockallDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, Kensington, London, UK.
Stuart A TaylorCentre for Medical Imaging, University College London, Charles Bell House, UK.
STREAMLINE investigators

Funding

Department of Health 10/68/01Department of Health ICA-CDRF-2017-03-053Health ResearchHealth Technology Assessment Programme 10/68/01Rosetrees TrustRoy Castle Lung Cancer FoundationUCLH Charitable FoundationUniversity College LondonWellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWhole body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) may be more efficient in staging cancers, but can be harder for patients to tolerate. We examined predictors of patient preference for WB-MRI vs. CT/ PET-CT for staging colorectal or lung cancer.

methodsPatients recruited prospectively to two multicentre trials comparing diagnostic accuracy of WB-MRI with standard staging scans were sent two questionnaires: the first, administered at trial registration, captured demographics, educational level and comorbidities; the second, administered after staging completion, measured emotional distress (GHQ-12), positive mood (PANAS), perceived scan burden, patients' beliefs about WB-MRI, and preference for either WB-MRI or CT (colorectal trial), WB-MRI or PET-CT (lung trial). Preference for WB-MRI or CT/ PET-CT was analysed using logistic regression.

resultsBaseline and post-staging questionnaires were completed by 97 and 107 patients, respectively. Overall, 56/107 (52%) preferred WB-MRI over standard scans and were more likely to have no additional comorbidities, higher positive mood, greater awareness of potential benefits of WB-MRI and lower levels of perceived WB-MRI scan burden. In adjusted analyses, only awareness of potential WB-MRI benefits remained a significant predictor (OR: 1.516, 95% CIs 1.006-2.284, P = 0.047). Knowledge that WB-MRI does not use radiation predicted preference (adjusted OR: 3.018, 95% CIs 1.099-8.288, P = 0.032), although only 45/107 (42%) patients were aware of this attribute.

conclusionsA small majority of patients undergoing staging of colorectal or lung cancer prefer WB-MRI to CT/ PET-CT. Raising awareness of the potential benefits of WB-MRI, notably lack of ionizing radiation, could influence preference.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overColonColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansLungLung NeoplasmsMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPatient PreferencePositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyProspective Studiescancermagnetic resonance imagingpatient preferencepositron emission tomographytomographyX-ray computed

Identifiers

PMID32410378
PMCPMC8425331

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.