ArticleJournal of computer assisted tomography
Imaging Biomarkers and Liquid Biopsy in Assessment of Cervical Cancer.
Article in Journal of computer assisted tomography. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Post-CCRT pelvic lymph node size and pathological nodal involvement in cervical cancer.International journal of clinical oncology · 2026Article
- Application of TransUnet Deep Learning Model for Automatic Segmentation of Cervical Cancer in Small-Field T2WI Images.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2025Article
- Current Update on PET/MRI in Gynecological Malignancies-A Review of the Literature.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
abstractThe role of imaging has been increasing in pretherapy planning and response assessment in cervical cancer, particularly in high-resource settings that provide access to computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and positron emission tomography (PET). In 2018, imaging was incorporated into the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system for cervical cancer. Magnetic resonance imaging is advantageous over CT for evaluation of the primary cervical cancer size and extent, because of superior contrast resolution. Furthermore, quantitative methods, including diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, show promise in improving treatment response and prognosis evaluation. Molecular imaging with fluorodeoxyglucose-PET/CT and PET/MRI can be particularly helpful in the detection of nodal disease and distant metastases. Semiautomated delineation of 3-dimensional tumor regions of interest has facilitated the development of novel PET-derived biomarkers that include metabolic volume and radiomics textural analysis features for prediction of outcomes. However, posttreatment inflammatory changes can be a confounder and lymph node evaluation is challenging, even with the use of PET/CT. Liquid biopsy has emerged as a promising tool that may be able to overcome some of the drawbacks inherent with imaging, such as limited ability to detect microscopic metastases or to distinguish between postchemoradiotherapy changes and residual tumor. Preliminary evidence suggests that liquid biopsy may be able to identify cervical cancer treatment response and resistance earlier than traditional methods. Future work should prioritize how to best synergize imaging and liquid biopsy as an integrated approach for optimal cervical cancer management.
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.