ArticleJapanese journal of radiology2025
Prediction of grading of ovarian endometrioid carcinoma using conventional MRI features.
Article in Japanese journal of radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- MRI features of ovarian metastases from appendiceal tumors and primary ovarian mucinous carcinoma: a comparative study.Japanese journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Comparison of MR Imaging of High-grade Serous Carcinomas with and without Homologous Recombination-deficiency.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to evaluate MRI findings of ovarian endometrioid carcinoma (OEC) as a predictor of histological grade. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study included 60 patients with histopathologically confirmed OEC (20, 30, and 10 with grades 1, 2, and 3, respectively). Clinical and MRI results were retrospectively reviewed. We compared the following parameters between the three grades: age, tumor markers, presence of uterine corpus cancer, bilaterality, configuration, peritoneal dissemination, abnormal ascites, signal intensities of cystic and solid components, tumor size, and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of solid components.
resultsT1-hyperintense cysts were more common in grade 1 than in grades 2-3 OEC (80% vs. 60%, vs. 40%, p < 0.05). The signal intensity ratio between the cystic components with the largest solid component and muscle (1.49 vs. 1.08 vs. 0.98, p < 0.05) was higher in grade 1 than in grades 2-3 OEC. Necrosis within solid components was less common in grade 1 than in grades 2-3 OEC (31% vs. 68% vs. 88%, p < 0.05), and the ADC values of solid components were higher in grade 1 than in grades 2-3 OEC (1.10 vs. 0.99 vs. 0.79 × 10
conclusionOn T1-weighted images, grade 1 OEC showed a higher signal intensity in the cystic components than grades 2-3 OEC. Necrosis and lower ADC values were more frequently observed in grades 2-3 than in grade 1 OEC.
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.