ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2021
Diagnostic efficacy of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements in differentiation of malignant intra-axial brain tumors
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of the Diffusion-Weighted Imaging Method Used in Association With the Apparent Diffusion Coefficient for Differentiating Between Primary Central Nervous System Lymphoma and High-Grade Glioma: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Pooled it
- Predictors for the Differentiation between Glioblastoma, Primary Central Nervous System Lymphoma, and Metastasis in Patients with a Solitary Enhancing Intracranial Mass.Asian journal of neurosurgery · 2024Article
- Longitudinal diffusion and volumetric kinetics of head and neck cancer magnetic resonance on a 1.5T MR-Linear accelerator hybrid system: A prospective R-IDEAL Stage 2a imaging biomarker characterization/ pre-qualification study.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: To evaluate diagnostic efficacy of the apparent diffusion coefficient measurements from tumor (ADCt) and tumor circumference hyperintensities (ADCtch) in different types of malignant intra-axial brain tumors. Materials and methods: Between April 2013 and June 2017, 125 patients (52 females (41.6%) and 73 males (58.4%); mean age: 53 years, age range: 14-81 years), who underwent diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with intracranial mass, were retrospectively evaluated. The mean ADCt and ADCtch values and ratios were measured. Results: Of the 125 patients, 22 (17.6%) had a low-grade glioma (LGG), 55 (44%) had a high-grade glioma (HGG), 32 (25.6%) had metastasis, and 16 (12.8%) had lymphoma diagnosis. There was a statistically significant difference in LGG and HGG in terms of mean ADCt and mean ADCtch values, and ratios. ADCtch values and ratios showed a statistically significant difference in the differentiation of HGG and metastasis and in the differentiation of HGG and lymphoma. According to ROC curve analysis, a cut-off value of 1.49 × 10−3 mm2/s for the mean ADCtch value generated the best combination of 70% sensitivity and 71% specificity for differentiation of HGGs and metastasis. The mean ADCtch value had the highest statistical predictive value for differentiation of HGGs and lymphoma with a sensitivity of 78% and a specificity of 76% for the optimal cut-off value of 0.82 × 10ˉ3 mm2/s. Conclusion: The mean ADCt ratio allowed reliable differentiation of LGG and high grade brain tumors, including HGGs, metastases, and lymphoma. The mean ADCtch might be a better imaging biomarker in the differentiation of HHG from metastasis and lymphoma.
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.