ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2022
Orthotopic Versus Allotopic Implantation: Comparison of Radiological and Pathological Characteristics.
Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effects of different exercise interventions on lower back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Pooled it
- Tumor implantation site dictates the immune landscape of syngeneic mouse models of head and neck cancer.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Early Detection of Chemotherapy-Induced Glucose Metabolic Alterations in Bladder Carcinoma Using Deuterium (Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- GDF10 exacerbates metastatic burden and cachexia in murine models of cancer.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Article
- Evidence-Based Severity Assessment of Animal Models for Pancreatic Cancer.Biomedicines · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn experimental animal models, implantation location might influence the heterogeneity and overall development of the tumor, leading to an interpretation bias. PURPOSE: To investigate the effects of implantation location in experimental tumor model using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and pathological findings. STUDY TYPE: Prospective. SUBJECTS: Forty-five breast cancer-bearing mice underwent orthotopic (N = 15) and heterotopic (intrahepatic [N = 15] and subcutaneous [N = 15]) implantation. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: Sequences including: T1-weighted turbo spin echo sequence, T2-weighted blade sequence, diffusion-weighted imaging, pre- and post-contrast T1 mapping, multi-echo T2 mapping at 3.0 T. ASSESSMENT: MRI was performed at 7, 14, and 21 days after implantation. Native T1, post-contrast T1, T2, and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) of tumors, the tumor volume and necrosis volume within tumor were obtained. Lymphocyte cells from H&E staining, Ki67-positive, and CD31-positive cells from immunohistochemistry were determined. STATISTICAL TESTS: One-way analysis of variance and Spearman's rank correlation were performed. P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
resultsThe tumor volume (intrahepatic vs. orthotopic vs. subcutaneous: 587.50 ± 77.62 mm DATA
conclusionOrthotopic and heterotopic tumors have their unique growth kinetics, necrosis volume, and vascular invasion. Non-invasive MR quantitative parameters, including ADC and post-contrast T1, may reflect vascular invasion in mice. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 3.
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.