Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38856797›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2024

Can Pretreatment MRI and Planning CT Radiomics Improve Prediction of Complete Pathological Response in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Following Neoadjuvant Treatment?

Jeba Karunya Ramireddy, A Sathya, Balu Krishna Sasidharan, Amal Joseph Varghese, Arvind Sathyamurthy, Neenu Oliver John, Anuradha Chandramohan, Ashish Singh, Anjana Joel, Rohin Mittal and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Clinical target volume radiomics from planning CT for pretreatment response prediction  in rectal cancer undergoing chemoradiotherapy.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

15 authors.

Jeba Karunya RamireddyQuantitative Imaging Research and Artificial Intelligence Lab, Department of Radiation Oncology, Unit 2, Dr Ida B Scudder Cancer Centre, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, 632004, India.
A SathyaQuantitative Imaging Research and Artificial Intelligence Lab, Department of Radiation Oncology, Unit 2, Dr Ida B Scudder Cancer Centre, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, 632004, India.
Balu Krishna SasidharanQuantitative Imaging Research and Artificial Intelligence Lab, Department of Radiation Oncology, Unit 2, Dr Ida B Scudder Cancer Centre, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, 632004, India.
Amal Joseph VargheseQuantitative Imaging Research and Artificial Intelligence Lab, Department of Radiation Oncology, Unit 2, Dr Ida B Scudder Cancer Centre, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, 632004, India.
Arvind SathyamurthyQuantitative Imaging Research and Artificial Intelligence Lab, Department of Radiation Oncology, Unit 2, Dr Ida B Scudder Cancer Centre, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, 632004, India.
Neenu Oliver JohnQuantitative Imaging Research and Artificial Intelligence Lab, Department of Radiation Oncology, Unit 2, Dr Ida B Scudder Cancer Centre, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, 632004, India.
Anuradha ChandramohanDepartment of Clinical Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India.
Ashish SinghDepartment of Medical Oncology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India.
Anjana JoelDepartment of Medical Oncology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India.
Rohin MittalDepartment of General Surgery, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India.
Dipti MasihDepartment of Pathology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India.
Kripa VargheseDepartment of Pathology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India.
Grace RebekahDepartment of Biostatistics, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India.
Thomas Samuel RamQuantitative Imaging Research and Artificial Intelligence Lab, Department of Radiation Oncology, Unit 2, Dr Ida B Scudder Cancer Centre, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, 632004, India.
Hannah Mary T ThomasQuantitative Imaging Research and Artificial Intelligence Lab, Department of Radiation Oncology, Unit 2, Dr Ida B Scudder Cancer Centre, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, 632004, India. hannah.thomas@cmcvellore.ac.in.

Funding

Christian Medical College, Vellore Fluid research major grant
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

OBJECTIVE(S): The treatment response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) differs largely in individuals treated for rectal cancer. In this study, we investigated the role of radiomics to predict the pathological response in locally advanced rectal cancers at different treatment time points: (1) before the start of any treatment using baseline T2-weighted MRI (T2W-MR) and (2) at the start of radiation treatment using planning CT.

methodsPatients on nCRT followed by surgery between June 2017 to December 2019 were included in the study. Histopathological tumour response grading (TRG) was used for classification, and gross tumour volume was defined by the radiation oncologists. Following resampling, 100 and 103 pyradiomic features were extracted from T2W-MR and planning CT images, respectively. Synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE) was used to address class imbalance. Four machine learning classifiers built clinical, radiomic, and merged models. Model performances were evaluated on a held-out test dataset following 3-fold cross-validation using area under the receiver operator characteristic curves (AUC) with bootstrap 95% confidence intervals.

resultsOne hundred and fifty patients were included; 58/150 with TRG 1 were classified as complete responders, and rest were incomplete responders (IR). Clinical models performed better (AUC = 0.68) compared to radiomics models (AUC = 0.62). Overall, the clinical + T2W-MR model showed best performance (AUC = 0.72) in predicting the pathological response prior to therapy. Clinical + Planning CT-merged models could only achieve the highest AUC of 0.66.

conclusionMerging clinical and baseline T2W-MR radiomics enhances predicting pathological response in rectal cancer. Validation in larger cohorts is warranted, especially for watch and wait strategies.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingNeoadjuvant TherapyRectal NeoplasmsTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadiomicsRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeMachine learningNeoadjuvant chemoradiationPathological complete responseRadiomicsRectal cancer

Identifiers

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.