ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2024
Multiple diffusion models for predicting pathologic response of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prognostic value of IVIM-DWI parameters for overall and recurrence-free survival in resected esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026Article
- Non-Gaussian diffusion MRI using CTRW and FROC models for early treatment response assessment in nasopharyngeal carcinoma.BMC medical imaging · 2026Article
- Intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion-weighted imaging in the staging of rectal non-mucinous adenocarcinoma.Polish journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Prediction of induction chemotherapy response in locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma based on three pretreatment non-Gaussian diffusion MRI models.BMC medical imaging · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo assess the feasibility and diagnostic performance of the fractional order calculus (FROC), continuous-time random-walk (CTRW), diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI), intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM), mono-exponential (MEM) and stretched exponential models (SEM) for predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study prospectively included consecutive ESCC patients with baseline and follow up MR imaging and pathologically confirmed cT1-4aN + M0 or T3-4aN0M0 and underwent radical resection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) between July 2019 and January 2023. Patients were divided into pCR (TRG 0) and non-pCR (TRG1 + 2 + 3) groups according to tumor regression grading (TRG). The Pre-, Post- and Delta-treatment models were built. 18 predictive models were generated according to different feature categories, based on six models by five-fold cross-validation. Areas under the curve (AUCs) of the models were compared by using DeLong method.
resultsOverall, 90 patients (71 men, 19 women; mean age, 64 years ± 6 [SD]) received NACT and underwent baseline and Post-NACT esophageal MRI, with 29 patients in the pCR group and 61 patients in the non-pCR group. Among 18 predictive models, The Pre-, Post-, and Delta-CTRW model showed good predictive efficacy (AUC = 0.722, 0.833 and 0.790). Additionally, the Post-FROC model (AUC = 0.907) also exhibited good diagnostic performance.
conclusionsOur study indicates that the CTRW model, along with the Post-FROC model, holds significant promise for the future of NACT efficacy prediction in ESCC patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38954001What 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.