ArticleCancers2023
Evaluation of Gliomas with Magnetic Resonance Fingerprinting with PET Correlation-A Comparative Study.
Article in Cancers, 2023. 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.
- Research Progress on Glioma Microenvironment and Invasiveness Utilizing Advanced Multi-Parametric Quantitative MRI.Cancers · 2024Review
- A Comparison of 7 Tesla MR Spectroscopic Imaging and 3 Tesla MR Fingerprinting for Tumor Localization in Glioma Patients.Cancers · 2024Article
- Advances in Neuro-Oncological Imaging: An Update on Diagnostic Approach to Brain Tumors.Cancers · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAdvanced MR imaging of brain tumors is still mainly based on qualitative imaging. PET imaging offers additive metabolic information, and MR fingerprinting (MRF) offers a novel approach to quantitative data acquisition. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of MRF to predict tumor regions and grading in combination with PET.
methodsSeventeen patients with histologically verified infiltrating gliomas and available amino-acid PET data were enrolled. ROIs for solid tumor parts (SPo), perifocal edema (ED1), and normal-appearing white matter (NAWM) were selected on conventional MRI sequences and aligned to the MRF and PET images. The predictability of gliomas by region and grading as well as intermodal correlations were assessed.
resultsFor MRF, we calculated an overall predictability by region (SPo, ED1, and NAWM) for all of the MRF parameters of 76.5%, 47.1%, and 94.1%, respectively. The overall ability to distinguish low- from high-grade gliomas using MRF was 88.9% for LGG and 75% for HGG, with an accuracy of 82.4%, a ppV of 85.71%, and an npV of 80%. PET positivity was found in 13/17 patients for solid tumor parts, and in 3/17 patients for the edema region. However, there was no significant difference in region-specific MRF values between PET positive and PET negative patients.
conclusionsMRF and PET provide quantitative measurements of the tumor tissue characteristics of gliomas, with good predictability. Nonetheless, the results are dissimilar, reflecting the different underlying mechanisms of each method.
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.