Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41109990›Full record

Observational studyActa oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden)2025

Low b-values in apparent diffusion coefficient calculations overestimate diffusion in rectal cancer.

Johanna A Hundvin, Marius Bornstein, Anne Negård, Stein H Holmedal, Sebastian Meltzer, Anne H Ree, Sara Pilskog, Kathrine R Redalen

Registry-linked trialAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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.

NCT01816607 completednot on this map

Functional MRI of Hypoxia-mediated Rectal Cancer Aggressiveness

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity Hospital, AkershusRan2013 to 2017Enrolled192ConditionsRectal Diseases, Rectal Neoplasms, Gastrointestinal Diseases, Gastrointestinal NeoplasmsArmsnew functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocols
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors.

Johanna A HundvinCancer Clinic, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Institute of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway. johanna.austrheim.hundvin@helse-bergen.no.ORCID 0000-0002-4181-3468
Marius BornsteinDepartment of Oncology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway.
Anne NegårdDepartment of Radiology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway; Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-7624-5595
Stein H HolmedalDepartment of Radiology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway.
Sebastian MeltzerDepartment of Oncology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-6640-3927
Anne H ReeDepartment of Oncology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway; Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-8264-3223
Sara PilskogCancer Clinic, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Institute of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-3475-7939
Kathrine R RedalenDepartment of Physics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-1172-4632

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Diffusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedRectal NeoplasmsAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID41109990
PMCPMC12553313

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.