Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32813028›Full record

ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2021

Accuracy of MRI for nodal restaging in rectal cancer: a retrospective study of 166 cases.

Sayali Pangarkar, Kunal Mistry, Amit Choudhari, Vasundhara Smriti, Ankita Ahuja, Aparna Katdare, Reena Engineer, Vikas Ostwal, Mukta Ramadwar, Avanish Saklani and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Nonoperative management of rectal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2024
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sayali PangarkarDepartment of Radio-Diagnosis, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India.
Kunal MistryDepartment of Radio-Diagnosis, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India.
Amit ChoudhariDepartment of Radio-Diagnosis, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India.
Vasundhara SmritiDepartment of Radio-Diagnosis, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India.
Ankita AhujaDepartment of Radio-Diagnosis, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India.
Aparna KatdareDepartment of Radio-Diagnosis, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India.
Reena EngineerHomi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Vikas OstwalHomi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Mukta RamadwarHomi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Avanish SaklaniHomi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Akshay D BahetiDepartment of Radio-Diagnosis, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. akshaybaheti@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-5376-6750
Homi Bhabha National Institute · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimAssessing metastatic mesorectal nodal involvement is a challenge in rectal cancer, especially in the post chemoradiation setting. We aim to assess the accuracy of MRI for nodal restaging and the validity of SAR criteria (≥ 5 mm size being metastatic). MATERIALS AND

methodsThis was an IRB-approved retrospective study of 166 patients with locally advanced rectal cancers, operated after neoadjuvant treatment. Two dedicated oncoradiologists reviewed the 166 post-chemoradiation presurgical MRIs in consensus. Nodal size and morphology (shape, margins, and signal intensity) were noted. The most accurate cut-off for size for predicting positive pN status was determined using the Youden index.

resultsMRI understaged 30/166 (18%) and overstaged 40/166 (24%) patients using the SAR criteria. The most accurate cut-off for node size was 5.5 mm, with a sensitivity of 75%, specificity of 60.2%, PPV of 40.7%, NPV of 86.9% (95% CI:78-92.5%), accuracy of 64.2%, and area under the curve (AUC) 0.657 (95% CI-0.524-0.79). Morphological characteristics were not significant to determine involvement, with positive nodes including 42% of round and 31% of oval nodes, 40% of heterogeneous and 45% of homogeneous nodes, and 31% irregularly marginated and 46% nodes with regular margins being positive on pathology. MRI was accurate in predicting pathology for mucinous nodes in 9/29 (31%) cases. Seven cases which were yN2 on MRI and yN0 on pathology demonstrated mucinous changes on MRI and had acellular mucin on histopathology.

conclusionsMRI has good negative predictive value, poor positive predictive value and moderate accuracy in nodal restaging. The cut-off of 5.5 mm demonstrated in our study is close to the SAR cut-off of 5 mm in the post-treatment setting. MRI accuracy is lower in patients with mucinous nodes.

Indexed as

Rectal NeoplasmsChemoradiotherapyHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeoplasm StagingRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID32813028
OpenAlexW3079195672

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.