Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39293798›Full record

ReviewCancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center

Risk Assessment and Radiomics Analysis in Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Pancreatic Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms (IPMN).

Federica Flammia, Roberta Fusco, Sonia Triggiani, Giuseppe Pellegrino, Alfonso Reginelli, Igino Simonetti, Piero Trovato, Sergio Venanzio Setola, Giuseppe Petralia, Antonella Petrillo and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center. 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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

12 authors.

Federica FlammiaSIRM Foundation, Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM), Milan, Italy.
Roberta FuscoMedical Oncology Division, Igea SpA, Napoli, Italy.
Sonia TriggianiPostgraduate School of Radiodiagnostics, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Giuseppe PellegrinoPostgraduate School of Radiodiagnostics, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Alfonso ReginelliDivision of Radiology, "Università Degli Studi Della Campania Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Igino SimonettiRadiology Division, Istituto Nazionale Tumori-IRCCS-Fondazione G. Pascale, Naples, Italy.
Piero TrovatoRadiology Division, Istituto Nazionale Tumori-IRCCS-Fondazione G. Pascale, Naples, Italy.
Sergio Venanzio SetolaRadiology Division, Istituto Nazionale Tumori-IRCCS-Fondazione G. Pascale, Naples, Italy.
Giuseppe PetraliaRadiology Division, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Antonella PetrilloRadiology Division, Istituto Nazionale Tumori-IRCCS-Fondazione G. Pascale, Naples, Italy.
Francesco IzzoDivisions of Hepatobiliary Surgery, "Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori IRCCS Fondazione G. Pascale", Naples, Italy.
Vincenza GranataRadiology Division, Istituto Nazionale Tumori-IRCCS-Fondazione G. Pascale, Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6601-3221

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) are a very common incidental finding during patient radiological assessment. These lesions may progress from low-grade dysplasia (LGD) to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and even pancreatic cancer. The IPMN progression risk grows with time, so discontinuation of surveillance is not recommended. It is very important to identify imaging features that suggest LGD of IPMNs, and thus, distinguish lesions that only require careful surveillance from those that need surgical resection. It is important to know the management guidelines and especially the indications for surgery, to be able to point out in the report the findings that suggest malignant degeneration. The imaging tools employed for diagnosis and risk assessment are Computed Tomography (CT) and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) with contrast medium. According to the latest European guidelines, MRI is the method of choice for the diagnosis and follow-up of patients with IPMN since this tool has a highest sensitivity in detecting mural nodules and intra-cystic septa. It plays a key role in the diagnosis of worrisome features and high-risk stigmata, which are associated with IPMNs malignant degeneration. Nowadays, the main limit of diagnostic tools is the ability to identify the precursor of pancreatic cancer. In this context, increasing attention is being given to artificial intelligence (AI) and radiomics analysis. However, these tools remain in an exploratory phase, considering the limitations of currently published studies. Key limits include noncompliance with AI best practices, radiomics workflow standardization, and clear reporting of study methodology, including segmentation and data balancing. In the radiological report it is useful to note the type of IPMN so as the morphological features, size, rate growth, wall, septa and mural nodules, on which the indications for surveillance and surgery are based. These features should be reported so as the surveillance time should be suggested according to guidelines.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingPancreatic Intraductal NeoplasmsPancreatic NeoplasmsAdenocarcinoma, MucinousCarcinoma, Pancreatic DuctalHumansRadiomicsRisk Assessmentintraductal papillary mucinous neoplasmsmagnetic resonance imagingpancreatic cancerradiomicsrisk assessment

Identifiers

PMID39293798
PMCPMC11412216

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.