Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34325107›Full record

ArticleESMO open2021

Treatment response of colorectal cancer liver metastases to neoadjuvant or conversion therapy: a prospective multicentre follow-up study using MRI, diffusion-weighted imaging and

A Uutela, A Ovissi, A Hakkarainen, A Ristimäki, N Lundbom, R Kallio, L M Soveri, T Salminen, A Ålgars, P Halonen and 14 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in ESMO open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

24 authors.

A UutelaDepartment of Transplantation and Liver Surgery, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
A OvissiDepartment of Radiology, HUS Medical Imaging Centre, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
A HakkarainenDepartment of Radiology, HUS Medical Imaging Centre, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland; Department of Neuroscience and Biomedical Engineering, Aalto University School of Science, Helsinki, Finland.
A RistimäkiDepartment of Pathology, HUS Diagnostic Centre and Applied Tumour Genomics, Research Programs Unit, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
N LundbomDepartment of Radiology, HUS Medical Imaging Centre, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
R KallioDepartment of Oncology, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland.
L M SoveriJoint Municipal Authority for Health Care and Social Services in Keski-Uusimaa, Home Care Geriatric Clinic and Palliative Care, Hyvinkää, Finland.
T SalminenDepartment of Oncology, Tampere University Hospital and University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland.
A ÅlgarsDepartment of Oncology, Turku University Hospital and University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
P HalonenDepartment of Oncology, Helsinki University Hospital Comprehensive Cancer Center and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
R RistamäkiDepartment of Oncology, Turku University Hospital and University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
A NordinDepartment of Transplantation and Liver Surgery, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
R Blanco SequeirosDepartment of Radiology, Turku University Hospital and University of Turku, Turku, Finland; Department of Radiology, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland.
I Rinta-KiikkaDepartment of Radiology, Medical Imaging Centre Tampere University Hospital and University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland; Department of Medical Physics, Medical Imaging Centre Tampere University Hospital and University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland.
E LanttoDepartment of Radiology, Päijät-Häme Central Hospital, Lahti, Finland.
J VirtanenDepartment of Radiology, Turku University Hospital and University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
E PääkköDepartment of Radiology, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland.
E LiukkonenDepartment of Radiology, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland.
J SaunavaaraDepartment of Radiology, Turku University Hospital and University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
P RyyminDepartment of Radiology, Medical Imaging Centre Tampere University Hospital and University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland; Department of Medical Physics, Medical Imaging Centre Tampere University Hospital and University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland.
E LammentaustaDepartment of Radiology, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland.
P OsterlundDepartment of Oncology, Tampere University Hospital and University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland; Department of Oncology, Helsinki University Hospital Comprehensive Cancer Center and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland; Department of Pathology/Oncology, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska sjukhuset - Tema Cancer, Stockholm, Sweden. Electronic address: pia.osterlund@helsinki.fi.
H IsoniemiDepartment of Transplantation and Liver Surgery, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
RAXO Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundColorectal cancer liver metastases respond to chemotherapy and targeted agents not only by shrinking, but also by morphologic and metabolic changes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the value of advanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) methods in predicting treatment response and survival. PATIENTS AND

methodsWe investigated contrast-enhanced MRI, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in diffusion-weighted imaging and

resultsIn 2012-2018, 52 patients at four Finnish university hospitals were recruited. Forty-seven patients received neoadjuvant or conversion chemotherapy and 40 liver resections were carried out. Low ADC values (below median) of the representative liver metastases, at baseline and after systemic therapy, were associated with partial response according to RECIST criteria, but not with morphologic MRI changes or histology. Decreasing ADC values following systemic therapy were associated with improved OS compared to unchanged or increasing ADC, both in the liver resected subgroup (5-year OS rate 100% and 34%, respectively, P = 0.022) and systemic therapy subgroup (5-year OS rate 62% and 23%, P = 0.049).

conclusionsLow ADC values at baseline or during systemic therapy were associated with treatment response by RECIST but not with histology, morphologic or detectable metabolic changes. A decreasing ADC during systemic therapy is associated with improved OS both in all patients receiving systemic therapy and in the resected subgroup.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsLiver NeoplasmsDiffusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingFollow-Up StudiesHumansMagnetic Resonance SpectroscopyNeoadjuvant TherapyProspective Studiescolorectal cancerdiffusion-weighted imagingliver metastasisliver surgerymagnetic resonance spectroscopyneoadjuvant chemotherapy

Identifiers

PMID34325107
PMCPMC8332656

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.