Observational studyActa oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden)2025
Low b-values in apparent diffusion coefficient calculations overestimate diffusion in rectal cancer.
Observational study in Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01816607 (Functional MRI of Hypoxia-mediated Rectal Cancer Aggressiveness), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Functional MRI of Hypoxia-mediated Rectal Cancer Aggressiveness
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- High-Resolution IVIM MRI Characterizes Diffusion-Perfusion Properties of the Parasagittal Dura.NMR in biomedicine · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Potential of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient-Based Lymph Node Classification in Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing [Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Advanced magnetic resonance imaging techniques for structural and functional assessment of salivary glands.Radiology and oncology · 2026Review
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
background and purposeThe apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), derived from diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI), is commonly calculated using a monoexponential model. However, there is no consensus on optimal b-value selection for ADC quantification in rectal cancer. This prospective observational study evaluated how varying b-value combinations influence ADC values. Patient/material and methods: DWI with seven b-values (b = 0, 25, 50, 100, 500, 1,000, and 1,300 s/mm2) was acquired from 23 rectal cancer patients in the OxyTarget study (NCT01816607) using a 1.5T Philips Achieva scanner. Two radiologists independently delineated whole-tumour volumes of interest. ADC values were calculated using 18 different b-value combinations and compared with a biexponential reference.
resultsTumour ADCs varied significantly across b-value combinations. Excluding low b-values (b ≤ 100 s/mm²) led to reduced ADCs. Although b = 0 s/mm² is commonly included in ADC calculations, this study demonstrates that its inclusion leads to substantial overestimation. The use of two or three b-values from b = 500, 1,000, and 1,300 s/mm² yielded the smallest deviations from the biexponential reference.
interpretationIn rectal cancer, tumour ADC calculated using the monoexponential model is strongly influenced by the choice of b-values. By eliminating the contribution from perfusion (b ≤ 100 s/mm2) the uncertainty in the calculations is significantly reduced. Our findings support the use of b-values exceeding 100 s/mm², ideally in combination with a high b-value of at least 1,000 s/mm², when assessing diffusion using the monoexponential model. Consistent b-value combinations across studies are recommended for reliable quantitative comparisons of ADC values.
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.