Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37024606›Full record

ReviewAbdominal radiology (New York)2023

Follow-up imaging of anal cancer after treatment.

Maria El Homsi, Shannon P Sheedy, Gaiane M Rauch, Dhakshina M Ganeshan, Randy D Ernst, Jennifer S Golia Pernicka

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. MR Imaging of Anal Cancer.Radiologic clinics of North America · 2025
    Review
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Maria El HomsiDepartment of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
Shannon P SheedyDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Gaiane M RauchDepartment of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Dhakshina M GaneshanDepartment of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Randy D ErnstDepartment of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Jennifer S Golia PernickaDepartment of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA. goliapej@mskcc.org.ORCID 0000-0002-1076-7948
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anal cancer treatment response assessment can be challenging with both magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and clinical evaluation considered essential. MRI, in particular, has shown to be useful for the assessment of treatment response, the detection of recurrent disease in follow up and surveillance, and the evaluation of possible post-treatment complications as well as complications from the tumor itself. In this review, we focus on the role of imaging, mainly MRI, in anal cancer treatment response assessment. We also describe the treatment complications that can occur, and the imaging findings associated with those complications.

Indexed as

Anus NeoplasmsMagnetic Resonance ImagingAnal CanalFollow-Up StudiesHumansAnal cancerAnal squamous cell carcinomaMagnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

PMID37024606
OpenAlexW4362663494

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.