ArticleThe British journal of radiology2024
Does CT overestimate extra-pancreatic perineural invasion in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma following neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy?
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Advances in Surgical Treatment Following Conversion Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2025Review
- Dissecting Tumor Size Underestimation in Pancreatic Cancer: A Comparative Analysis of Preoperative Treatments.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
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 at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the diagnostic performance of CT in the assessment of extra-pancreatic perineural invasion (EPNI) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).
methodsThis retrospective study included 123 patients (66 men; median age, 66 years) with PDAC who underwent radical surgery and pancreatic protocol CT for assessing surgical resectability between September 2011 and March 2019. Among the 123 patients, 97 patients had received neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT). Two radiologists reviewed the CT images for evidence of EPNI using a 5-point scale (5 = definitely present, 4 = probably present, 3 = equivocally present, 2 = probably absent, and 1 = definitely absent). Diagnostic performance for assessing EPNI was evaluated with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.
resultsThe sensitivity, specificity, and area under the ROC curve for assessing EPNI were 98%, 30%, and 0.62 in all patients; 97%, 22%, and 0.59 in patients with neoadjuvant CRT; and 100%, 100%, and 1.00 in patients without neoadjuvant CRT, respectively. False-positive assessment of EPNI occurred in 23% of patients (n = 28/123), and 100% of these (n = 28/28) had received neoadjuvant CRT. There was moderate to substantial agreement between the readers (ĸ = 0.49-0.62).
conclusionPancreatic protocol CT has better diagnostic performance for determination of EPNI in treatment naïve patients with PDAC and overestimation of EPNI is likely in patients who have received preoperative CRT. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Pancreatic protocol CT has better diagnostic performance for the detection of EPNI in treatment naïve patients compared to patients receiving neoadjuvant CRT.
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.