ArticleOncology letters2024
Comparative effectiveness of two abbreviated rectal MRI protocols in assessing tumor response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer.
Article in Oncology letters, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study aimed to compare the effectiveness of two abbreviated magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocols in assessing the response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in patients with rectal cancer. Data from the examinations of 62 patients with rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant CRT and standard contrast-enhanced rectal MRI were retrospectively evaluated. Standard contrast-enhanced T2-weighted imaging (T2-WI), post-contrast T1-weighted imaging (T1-WI) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) MRI, as well as two abbreviated protocols derived from these images, namely protocol AB1 (T2-WI and DWI) and protocol AB2 (post-contrast fat-suppressed (FS) T1-WI and DWI), were assessed. Measurements of lesion length and width, lymph node short-axis length, tumor staging, circumferential resection margin (CRM), presence of extramural venous invasion (EMVI), luminal mucin accumulation (MAIN), mucinous response, mesorectal fascia (MRF) involvement, and MRI-based tumor regression grade (mrTRG) were obtained. The reliability and compatibility of the AB1 and AB2 protocols in the evaluation of tumor response were analyzed. The imaging performed according to the AB1 and AB2 protocols revealed significant decreases in lesion length, width and lymph node size after CRT. These protocols also showed reductions in lymph node positivity, CRM, MRF, EMVI.Furthermore, both protocols were found to be reliable in determining lesion length and width. Additionally, compliance was observed between the protocols in determining lymph node size and positivity, CRM involvement, and EMVI after CRT. In conclusion, the use of abbreviated MRI protocols, specifically T2-WI with DWI sequences or post-contrast FS T1-WI with DWI sequences, is effective for evaluating tumor response in patients with rectal cancer following neoadjuvant CRT. The AB protocols examined in this study yielded similar results in terms of lesion length and width, lymph node positivity, CRM involvement, EMVI, MAIN, and MRF involvement.
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.