ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Comparative evaluation of imaging methods for prognosis assessment in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: focus on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography and esophagography.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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.
- Preoperative esophageal cancer staging assessment based on intravoxel incoherent motion and apparent diffusion coefficient: a comparative study of maximum-diameter slice region of interest and whole volume of interest analysis.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficient values and clinicopathologic features in rectal cancer: a cross-sectional study.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Prognostic factors in locally advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a clinical and radiomic analysis of neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy before surgery.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Delta-CT radiomics based model for predicting postoperative anastomotic leakage following radical resection of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
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
Objective: To identify the most sensitive imaging examination method to evaluate the prognosis of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Materials and methods: Thirty patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) participated in the study and underwent chemoradiotherapy (CRT). They were divided into two groups based on their survival status: the survival group and non-survival group. The diagnostic tests were utilized to determine the most effective imaging examination method for assessing the prognosis. Results: 1. There were no significant differences in tumor length shown on esophagography or computed tomography (CT) or the maximal esophageal wall thickness shown on CT at the specified time points between the two groups. 2. The tumor length on diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in the survival group was significantly lower than in the non-survival group at the end of the sixth week of treatment (P=0.001). The area under the ROC curve was 0.840 (P=0.002), and the diagnostic efficiency was moderately accurate. 3. The apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of the survival group were significantly higher than those in the non-survival group at the end of the fourth week and sixth week of treatment (both P<0.001). Areas under the curve were 0.866 and 0.970, with P values of 0.001 and <0.001 and good diagnostic accuracy. Cox regression analyses indicated the ADC at the end of the sixth week of treatment was an independent risk factor. Conclusions: Compared with esophagography and CT, DW-MRI has certain advantages in predicting the prognosis of ESCC.
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.