ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2026
Evaluating the utility of enhanced T1 mapping MR imaging in assessing depth of myometrial invasion and detecting DNA mismatch repair status in endometrial cancer: a pilot study.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the value of enhanced T1 mapping MR imaging in assessing the depth of myometrial invasion (MI) and in detecting DNA mismatch repair (MMR) status in endometrial cancer (EC) as a non-invasive imaging biomarker.
methodsThis prospective study enrolled 46 patients with pathologically confirmed EC who underwent pelvic MRI and surgery within two weeks. Each patient underwent multiparametric MRI including T2-weighted imaging (T2WI), diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging (DCE), native T1 mapping and enhanced T1 mapping. Four radiologists (two junior, two senior) independently assessed MI depth of EC using two combinations: T2WI + DWI + DCE and T2WI + DWI + enhanced T1 mapping. Histopathology served as the reference standard. MMR status was determined by immunohistochemistry. Quantitative analysis of native T1, enhanced T1, and Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values was performed, and inter-reader agreement and diagnostic performance were compared. Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis was performed. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.
resultsThe diagnostic accuracy of T2WI + DWI + enhanced T1 mapping for assessing MI was higher than that of T2WI + DWI + DCE across all readers, especially among junior radiologists, though differences were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). Inter-reader agreement improved with enhanced T1 mapping, particularly for junior readers (κ = 0.898 vs. κ = 0.538). Native T1 values were significantly higher in the proficient MMR group compared to the deficient MMR group (1655.5 ± 131.9 ms vs. 1549.1 ± 125.9 ms, P = 0.047). ROC analysis yielded an Area under the curve (AUC) of 0.729 for differentiating deficient MMR from proficient MMR, with a sensitivity of 87.0% and specificity of 67.7% at a cutoff of 1524.7 ms.
conclusionEnhanced T1 mapping, when incorporated into routine MR protocols, offers diagnostic performance comparable to DCE for evaluating myometrial invasion in endometrial cancer and significantly improves inter-reader agreement. Native T1 values show promise as a non-invasive biomarker for detecting MMR status in EC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40828400What 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.