Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32491246›Full record

ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2020

Harmonization of Quantitative Parenchymal Enhancement in T

Bas H M van der Velden, Michael J van Rijssel, Beatrice Lena, Marielle E P Philippens, Claudette E Loo, Max A A Ragusi, Sjoerd G Elias, Elizabeth J Sutton, Elizabeth A Morris, Lambertus W Bartels and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Bas H M van der VeldenImage Sciences Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3750-2824
Michael J van RijsselImage Sciences Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2365-4408
Beatrice LenaImage Sciences Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Marielle E P PhilippensDepartment of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0205-3459
Claudette E LooDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Max A A RagusiImage Sciences Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2344-6182
Sjoerd G EliasJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Elizabeth J SuttonDepartment of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Elizabeth A MorrisDepartment of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5069-0992
Lambertus W BartelsImage Sciences Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Kenneth G A GilhuijsImage Sciences Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Utrecht University · NLMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USThe Netherlands Cancer Institute · NL

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDifferences in imaging parameters influence computer-extracted parenchymal enhancement measures from breast MRI. PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of differences in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI acquisition parameter settings on quantitative parenchymal enhancement of the breast, and to evaluate harmonization of contrast-enhancement values with respect to flip angle and repetition time. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective. PHANTOM/POPULATIONS: We modeled parenchymal enhancement using simulations, a phantom, and two cohorts (N = 398 and N = 302) from independent cancer centers. SEQUENCE FIELD/STRENGTH: 1.5T dynamic contrast-enhanced T ASSESSMENT: We assessed harmonization of parenchymal enhancement in simulations and phantom by varying the MR parameters that influence the amount of T STATISTICAL TESTS: Paired Wilcoxon signed-rank-test of bootstrapped kernel density estimations.

resultsBefore harmonization, simulated enhancement values had a median (IQR) of 0.46 (0.34-0.49). After harmonization, the IQR was reduced: median (IQR): 0.44 (0.44-0.45). In the phantom, the IQR also decreased, median (IQR): 0.96 (0.59-1.22) before harmonization, 0.96 (0.91-1.02) after harmonization. Harmonization yielded significantly (P < 0.001) better overlap in parenchymal enhancement between the cohorts: median (IQR) was 0.46 (0.37-0.58) for cohort 1 vs. 0.37 (0.30-0.44) for cohort 2 before harmonization (57% overlap); and 0.35 (0.28-0.43) vs. .0.37 (0.30-0.44) after harmonization (85% overlap). DATA

conclusionThe proposed practical harmonization method enables an accurate comparison between patients scanned with differences in imaging parameters. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 4.

Indexed as

BreastMagnetic Resonance ImagingHumansImage EnhancementPhantoms, ImagingReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID32491246
PMCPMC7687185
OpenAlexW3029542422

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.