Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33436737›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Precise enhancement quantification in post-operative MRI as an indicator of residual tumor impact is associated with survival in patients with glioblastoma.

Alonso Garcia-Ruiz, Pablo Naval-Baudin, Marta Ligero, Albert Pons-Escoda, Jordi Bruna, Gerard Plans, Nahum Calvo, Monica Cos, Carles Majós, Raquel Perez-Lopez

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Alonso Garcia-RuizRadiomics Group, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), 117 Natzaret, 08035, Barcelona, Spain.
Pablo Naval-BaudinDepartment of Radiology, Institut de Diagnòstic Per La Imatge (IDI), Bellvitge University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain.
Marta LigeroRadiomics Group, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), 117 Natzaret, 08035, Barcelona, Spain.
Albert Pons-EscodaDepartment of Radiology, Institut de Diagnòstic Per La Imatge (IDI), Bellvitge University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain.
Jordi BrunaNeuro-Oncology Unit, Institut d'Investigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL), Barcelona, Spain.
Gerard PlansNeuro-Oncology Unit, Institut d'Investigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL), Barcelona, Spain.
Nahum CalvoDepartment of Radiology, Institut de Diagnòstic Per La Imatge (IDI), Bellvitge University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain.
Monica CosDepartment of Radiology, Institut de Diagnòstic Per La Imatge (IDI), Bellvitge University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain.
Carles MajósDepartment of Radiology, Institut de Diagnòstic Per La Imatge (IDI), Bellvitge University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain.
Raquel Perez-LopezRadiomics Group, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), 117 Natzaret, 08035, Barcelona, Spain. rperez@vhio.net.
Bellvitge University Hospital · ESVall d'Hebron Institute of OncologyInstitut d'Investigació Biomédica de Bellvitge · ESVall d'Hebron Hospital Universitari · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Glioblastoma is the most common primary brain tumor. Standard therapy consists of maximum safe resection combined with adjuvant radiochemotherapy followed by chemotherapy with temozolomide, however prognosis is extremely poor. Assessment of the residual tumor after surgery and patient stratification into prognostic groups (i.e., by tumor volume) is currently hindered by the subjective evaluation of residual enhancement in medical images (magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]). Furthermore, objective evidence defining the optimal time to acquire the images is lacking. We analyzed 144 patients with glioblastoma, objectively quantified the enhancing residual tumor through computational image analysis and assessed the correlation with survival. Pathological enhancement thickness on post-surgical MRI correlated with survival (hazard ratio: 1.98, p < 0.001). The prognostic value of several imaging and clinical variables was analyzed individually and combined (radiomics AUC 0.71, p = 0.07; combined AUC 0.72, p < 0.001). Residual enhancement thickness and radiomics complemented clinical data for prognosis stratification in patients with glioblastoma. Significant results were only obtained for scans performed between 24 and 72 h after surgery, raising the possibility of confounding non-tumor enhancement in very early post-surgery MRI. Regarding the extent of resection, and in agreement with recent studies, the association between the measured tumor remnant and survival supports maximal safe resection whenever possible.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBrain NeoplasmsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGlioblastomaHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm, ResidualNeurosurgical ProceduresPrognosisRetrospective StudiesSurvival Rate

Identifiers

PMID33436737
PMCPMC7804103
OpenAlexW3119973393

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.