ArticleSkeletal radiology2024
Diagnosis and monitoring denosumab therapy of giant cell tumors of bone: radiologic-pathologic correlation.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the value of CT and dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE-)MRI for monitoring denosumab therapy of giant cell tumors of bone (GCTB) by correlating it to histopathology. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients with GCTB under denosumab treatment and monitored with CT and (DCE-)MRI (2012-2021) were retrospectively included. Imaging and (semi-)quantitative measurements were used to assess response/relapse. Tissue samples were analyzed using computerized segmentation for vascularization and number of neoplastic and giant cells. Pearson's correlation/Spearman's rank coefficient and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to assess correlations between histopathology and radiology.
resultsSix patients (28 ± 8years; five men) were evaluated. On CT, good responders showed progressive re-ossification (+7.8HU/month) and cortical remodeling (woven bone). MRI showed an SI decrease relative to muscle on T1-weighted (-0.01 A.U./month) and on fat-saturated T2-weighted sequences (-0.03 A.U./month). Time-intensity-curves evolved from a type IV with high first pass, high amplitude, and steep wash-out to a slow type II. An increase in time-to-peak (+100%) and a decrease in Ktrans (-71%) were observed. This is consistent with microscopic examination, showing a decrease of giant cells (-76%), neoplastic cells (-63%), and blood vessels (-28%). There was a strong statistical significant inverse correlation between time-to-peak and microvessel density (ρ = -0.9, p = 0.01). Significantly less neoplastic (p = 0.03) and giant cells (p = 0.04) were found with a time-intensity curve type II, compared to a type IV. Two patients showed relapse after initial good response when stopping denosumab. Inverse imaging and pathological findings were observed.
conclusionCT and (DCE-)MRI show a good correlation with pathology and allow adequate evaluation of response to denosumab and detection of therapy failure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37515643What 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.