Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32676924›Full record

ArticleInsights into imaging2020

Follow-up after radiological intervention in oncology: ECIO-ESOI evidence and consensus-based recommendations for clinical practice.

Monique Maas, Regina Beets-Tan, Jean-Yves Gaubert, Fernando Gomez Munoz, Paul Habert, Lisa G Klompenhouwer, Paulo Vilares Morgado, Niklaus Schaefer, Francois H Cornelis, Stephen B Solomon and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Insights into imaging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. MRI after Interventional Therapy of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Typical Changes over Time.RoFo : Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin · 2026
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. New frontiers in radioembolization.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2024
    Review
  20. 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

12 authors at 6 institutions in 6 countries.

Monique MaasDept of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7721-2341
Regina Beets-TanDept of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jean-Yves GaubertDept of Radiology, CHU Hospital Timone, Marseille, France.
Fernando Gomez MunozDept of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Paul HabertDept of Radiology, CHU Hospital Timone, Marseille, France.
Lisa G KlompenhouwerDept of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Paulo Vilares MorgadoDept of Radiology, S. João University Hospital, Porto, Portugal.
Niklaus SchaeferDept of Radiology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Francois H CornelisDept of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA.
Stephen B SolomonDept of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA.
Denise van der ReijdDept of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jose Ignacio BilbaoDept of Radiology, University Clinic of Navarra, Calle Benjamín de Tudela, 2, 31008, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain. jibilbao@unav.es.
The Netherlands Cancer Institute · NLAix-Marseille Université · FRMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USClinica Universidad de Navarra · ESHospital de São João · PTUniversity Hospital of Lausanne · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interventional radiology plays an important and increasing role in cancer treatment. Follow-up is important to be able to assess treatment success and detect locoregional and distant recurrence and recommendations for follow-up are needed. At ECIO 2018, a joint ECIO-ESOI session was organized to establish follow-up recommendations for oncologic intervention in liver, renal, and lung cancer. Treatments included thermal ablation, TACE, and TARE. In total five topics were evaluated: ablation in colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), TARE in CRLM, TACE and TARE in HCC, ablation in renal cancer, and ablation in lung cancer. Evaluated modalities were FDG-PET-CT, CT, MRI, and (contrast-enhanced) ultrasound. Prior to the session, five experts were selected and performed a systematic review and presented statements, which were voted on in a telephone conference prior to the meeting by all panelists. These statements were presented and discussed at the ECIO-ESOI session at ECIO 2018. This paper presents the recommendations that followed from these initiatives. Based on expert opinions and the available evidence, follow-up schedules were proposed for liver cancer, renal cancer, and lung cancer. FDG-PET-CT, CT, and MRI are the recommended modalities, but one should beware of false-positive signs of residual tumor or recurrence due to inflammation early after the intervention. There is a need for prospective preferably multicenter studies to validate new techniques and new response criteria. This paper presents recommendations that can be used in clinical practice to perform the follow-up of patients with liver, lung, and renal cancer who were treated with interventional locoregional therapies.

Indexed as

Interventional radiologyLiverLung cancerOncologyRecommendations

Identifiers

PMID32676924
PMCPMC7366866
OpenAlexW3043159877

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.