Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35678860›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2022

Quantification and reduction of cross-vendor variation in multicenter DWI MR imaging: results of the Cancer Core Europe imaging task force.

Oliver Lukas Sedlaczek, Jens Kleesiek, Ferdia A Gallagher, Jacob Murray, Sebastian Prinz, Raquel Perez-Lopez, Evia Sala, Caroline Caramella, Sebastian Diffetock, Nathalie Lassau and 12 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

22 authors.

Oliver Lukas SedlaczekDepartment of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. O.Sedlaczek@nct-heidelberg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8709-5481
Jens KleesiekDepartment of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Ferdia A GallagherDepartment of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Jacob MurrayDepartment of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Sebastian PrinzDepartment of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Raquel Perez-LopezDepartment of Radiology, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain.
Evia SalaDepartment of Radiology, University of Cambridge and Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cambridge, UK.
Caroline CaramellaImaging Department, Gustave Roussy, BIOMAPS, UMR1281, INSERM, CEA, CNRS, Université Paris Saclay, Villejuif, Paris, France.
Sebastian DiffetockImaging Department, Gustave Roussy, BIOMAPS, UMR1281, INSERM, CEA, CNRS, Université Paris Saclay, Villejuif, Paris, France.
Nathalie LassauImaging Department, Gustave Roussy, BIOMAPS, UMR1281, INSERM, CEA, CNRS, Université Paris Saclay, Villejuif, Paris, France.
Andrew N PriestDepartment of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Chikako SuzukiDepartment of Radiation Physics and Nuclear Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital and Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden.
Roberto VargasDepartment of Radiology, Karolinska University Hospital and Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden.
Tommaso GiandiniMedical Physics Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Marta VaianiDepartment of Radiology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Antonella MessinaDepartment of Radiology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Lennart K BlomqvistDepartment of Radiation Physics and Nuclear Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital and Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden.
Regina G H Beets-TanDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Petra OberrauchDivision of Translational Medical Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases Heidelberg (NCT) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 460, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Heinz-Peter SchlemmerDepartment of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Michael BachDepartment of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
CCE – Imaging Task Force

Funding

Cancer Research UK 16628Cancer Research UK 27150Cancer Research UK 28667
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIn the Cancer Core Europe Consortium (CCE), standardized biomarkers are required for therapy monitoring oncologic multicenter clinical trials. Multiparametric functional MRI and particularly diffusion-weighted MRI offer evident advantages for noninvasive characterization of tumor viability compared to CT and RECIST. A quantification of the inter- and intraindividual variation occurring in this setting using different hardware is missing. In this study, the MRI protocol including DWI was standardized and the residual variability of measurement parameters quantified.

methodsPhantom and volunteer measurements (single-shot T2w and DW-EPI) were performed at the seven CCE sites using the MR hardware produced by three different vendors. Repeated measurements were performed at the sites and across the sites including a traveling volunteer, comparing qualitative and quantitative ROI-based results including an explorative radiomics analysis.

resultsFor DWI/ADC phantom measurements using a central post-processing algorithm, the maximum deviation could be decreased to 2%. However, there is no significant difference compared to a decentralized ADC value calculation at the respective MRI devices. In volunteers, the measurement variation in 2 repeated scans did not exceed 11% for ADC and is below 20% for single-shot T2w in systematic liver ROIs. The measurement variation between sites amounted to 20% for ADC and < 25% for single-shot T2w. Explorative radiomics classification experiments yield better results for ADC than for single-shot T2w.

conclusionHarmonization of MR acquisition and post-processing parameters results in acceptable standard deviations for MR/DW imaging. MRI could be the tool in oncologic multicenter trials to overcome the limitations of RECIST-based response evaluation. KEY POINTS: • Harmonizing acquisition parameters and post-processing homogenization, standardized protocols result in acceptable standard deviations for multicenter MR-DWI studies. • Total measurement variation does not to exceed 11% for ADC in repeated measurements in repeated MR acquisitions, and below 20% for an identical volunteer travelling between sites. • Radiomic classification experiments were able to identify stable features allowing for reliable discrimination of different physiological tissue samples, even when using heterogeneous imaging data.

Indexed as

Diffusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingNeoplasmsEuropeHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingPhantoms, ImagingReproducibility of ResultsDiffusion-weighted MRIMagnetic resonance imagingMulticenter, oncologic studies, Measurement VariabilityRadiomics

Identifiers

PMID35678860
PMCPMC9705481

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.