Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33228564›Full record

ArticleBMC medical imaging2020

Differentiation between high-grade gliomas and solitary brain metastases: a comparison of five diffusion-weighted MRI models.

Jiaji Mao, Weike Zeng, Qinyuan Zhang, Zehong Yang, Xu Yan, Huiting Zhang, Mengzhu Wang, Guang Yang, Minxiong Zhou, Jun Shen

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical imaging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

10 authors.

Jiaji MaoDepartment of Radiology, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, No. 107 Yanjiang Road West, Guangzhou, 510120, China.
Weike ZengDepartment of Radiology, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, No. 107 Yanjiang Road West, Guangzhou, 510120, China.
Qinyuan ZhangDepartment of Radiology, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, No. 107 Yanjiang Road West, Guangzhou, 510120, China.
Zehong YangDepartment of Radiology, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, No. 107 Yanjiang Road West, Guangzhou, 510120, China.
Xu YanMR Scientific Marketing, Siemens Healthcare, No. 278 Zhouzhu Road, Shanghai, 201318, China.
Huiting ZhangMR Scientific Marketing, Siemens Healthcare, No. 278 Zhouzhu Road, Shanghai, 201318, China.
Mengzhu WangMR Scientific Marketing, Siemens Healthcare, No. 278 Zhouzhu Road, Shanghai, 201318, China.
Guang YangShanghai Key Laboratory of Magnetic Resonance, Institute of Physics and Electronics Science, East China Normal University, No. 3663 North Zhongshan Road, Shanghai, 200062, China.
Minxiong ZhouCollege of Medical Imaging, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Molecular Imaging, Shanghai University of Medicine and Health Sciences, No. 279 Zhouzhu Road, Shanghai, 201318, China.
Jun ShenDepartment of Radiology, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, No. 107 Yanjiang Road West, Guangzhou, 510120, China. shenjun@mail.sysu.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0001-7746-5285

Funding

Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities 20ykpy102Guangdong Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation 2019A1515110189Guangdong Natural Science Foundation 2017A030313777Guangdong Province Universities and Colleges Pearl River Scholar Funded Scheme 2017Key Areas Research and Development Program of Guangdong 2019B020235001Medical science and Technology Research Fund of Guangdong Province A2020074National Natural Science Foundation of China 82001768National Natural Science Foundation of China U1801681
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo compare the diagnostic performance of neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging (NODDI), mean apparent propagator magnetic resonance imaging (MAP-MRI), diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI), diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in distinguishing high-grade gliomas (HGGs) from solitary brain metastases (SBMs).

methodsPatients with previously untreated, histopathologically confirmed HGGs (n = 20) or SBMs (n = 21) appearing as a solitary and contrast-enhancing lesion on structural MRI were prospectively recruited to undergo diffusion-weighted MRI. DWI data were obtained using a q-space Cartesian grid sampling procedure and were processed to generate parametric maps by fitting the NODDI, MAP-MRI, DKI, DTI and DWI models. The diffusion metrics of the contrast-enhancing tumor and peritumoral edema were measured. Differences in the diffusion metrics were compared between HGGs and SBMs, followed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and the Hanley and McNeill test to determine their diagnostic performances.

resultsNODDI-based isotropic volume fraction (V

conclusionNODDI outperforms MAP-MRI, DKI, DTI and DWI in differentiating between HGGs and SBMs. NODDI-based V

Indexed as

Diffusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingNeuroimagingAdultAgedBrain EdemaBrain NeoplasmsContrast MediaFemaleGliomaHumansMaleMiddle AgedROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificityYoung AdultContrast MediaBrain metastasisDiffusion-weighted imagingGliomaMagnetic resonance imagingNon-Gaussian

Identifiers

PMID33228564
PMCPMC7684933

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.