ArticleCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society2020
A prospective analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of 3 T MRI, CT and endoscopic ultrasound for preoperative T staging of potentially resectable esophageal cancer.
Article in Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Survival benefit of ⁶⁸Ga-FAPI PET/CT staging for prognostic assessment in gastric and colorectal cancer compared with CE-CT and ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT: a single-center retrospective study.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Computed tomography- and magnetic resonance imaging-based multi-modality radiomics models for predicting survival in esophageal cancer patients.Translational oncology · 2026Article
- Three-Dimensional Reconstruction and Navigation Systems in Endoscopic Ultrasound Procedures: A Comprehensive Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Long-term prognostic comparison of surgery followed by adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus definitive chemoradiotherapy in T4N0-3M0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a single-center retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Automated segmentation of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in contrast-enhanced free-breathing 3D-GRE: a comparative study of UNet, nnUNet, and UMamba for tumor delineation.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- Navigating Diagnostic Challenges in Pseudoachalasia: A Case Study of Esophagogastric Junction Adenocarcinoma.The American journal of case reports · 2025Article
- Evaluation of MRI for initial staging of esophageal cancer: the STIRMCO study.European radiology · 2025Article
- Development of a deep learning model for T1N0 gastric cancer diagnosis using 2.5D radiomic data in preoperative CT images.NPJ precision oncology · 2025Article
- Ex vivo study of Porcine esophagus magnetic resonance imaging with a compact endoluminal coil.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Advancing Esophageal Cancer Staging and Restaging: The Role of MRI in Precision Diagnosis.Cancers · 2025Review
- Clinical usefulness of four-dimensional dynamic ventilation CT for borderline resectable locally advanced esophageal cancer.Japanese journal of radiology · 2025Article
- Role of high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging in preoperative tumor-node-metastasis staging evaluation of esophageal cancer: a narrative review.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Review
- Automatic segmentation of esophageal cancer, metastatic lymph nodes and their adjacent structures in CTA images based on the UperNet Swin network.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- How to update esophageal masses imaging using literature review (MRI and CT features).Insights into imaging · 2024Review
- Computed tomography radiomics identification of T1-2 and T3-4 stages of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: two-dimensional or three-dimensional?Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Article
- CT radiomics in the identification of preoperative understaging in patients with clinical stage T1-2N0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Collaborative multidisciplinary management and expertise of cT2-3 locally advanced operable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a report of two cases.Journal of thoracic disease · 2023Article
- Impact of MRI on the post-therapeutic diagnosis of T4 esophageal cancer.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2023Article
- Aorta and tracheobronchial invasion in esophageal cancer: comparing diagnostic performance of 3.0-T MRI and CT.European radiology · 2023Article
- Non-curative resection for surgical T4b esophageal cancer: esophagectomy or non-esophagectomy?Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatients with esophageal cancer (EC) undergo endoscopic ultrasound and CT based cancer staging. Recent technical developments allow improved MRI quality with diminished motion artifact that may allow MRI to compare favorable to CT for noninvasive staging. Hence the purpose of the study was to assess image quality and diagnostic accuracy of 3 T MRI versus CT and EUS for preoperative T-staging of potentially resectable esophageal cancer.
methodsBetween October-2014 and December-2017, esophageal cancer patients with T-staging by EUS were enrolled in this prospective study. Post-operative histopathologic T-staging was the reference standard. All participants underwent MRI [T2- multi-shot turbo spin echo sequence (msTSE), diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), and 3D gradient-echo based sequence (3D-GRE)] and CT [non-contrast and multiphase contrast-enhanced CT scanning] 5.6 + 3.6 days after endoscopy. Surgery was performed within 3.6 + 3.5 days after imaging. Two blinded endoscopists (reader 1 and 2) and radiologists (reader 3 and 4) independently evaluated EUS and CT/MRI, respectively. Considering the clinical relevance, patients were dichotomized into early (T1 and T2) vs late (T3 and T4) stage cancer before assessment. For statistical purpose, the binary decision was defined as the ability of the imaging technique to diagnose early stage/not early stage esophageal cancer. Diagnostic performance of EUS, MRI and CT was compared using McNemar's test with Bonferroni correction; kappa values were assessed for reader performance.
results74 study participants (60 ± 8 yrs.; 56 men) with esophageal cancer were evaluated, of whom 85%(63/74) had squamous cell carcinoma, 61%(45/74) were at early stage and 39%(29/74) were at late stage cancer, as determined by histopathology. Intra- and Inter-reader agreement for pre-operative vs post-operative T-staging was excellent for all imaging modalities. Compared to CT, MRI showed significantly higher accuracy for both the readers (reader3: 96% vs 82%, p = 0.0038, reader4: 95% vs 80%, p = 0.0076, for MRI vs CT, respectively). Further, MRI outperformed EUS with higher specificity (reader 1 vs 3: 59% vs 93%, p = 0.0015, reader 2 vs 4: 66% vs 93%, p = 0.0081, for EUS vs MRI respectively), and accuracy (reader 1 vs 3: 81% vs 96%, p = 0.0022, reader 2 vs 4: 85% vs 95%, p = 0.057, for EUS vs MRI, respectively).
conclusionFor resectable esophageal cancer, MRI had better diagnostic performance for tumor staging compared to CT and EUS.
trial registrationChiCTR, ChiCTR-DOD, Registered 2nd October 2014, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=9620.
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.