ArticleBMC gastroenterology2026
Early prediction of response to chemotherapy with Cetuximab in colorectal liver metastasis with contrast-enhanced ultrasound perfusion analysis.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the feasibility of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) for early prediction of treatment response to chemotherapy combined with Cetuximab (Cet) in colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM).
methodsFrom June 2023 and October 2024, 139 consecutive patients with CRLM who underwent chemotherapy with Cet were sequentially allocated into a training cohort (n = 105) and a validation cohort (n = 34). CEUS examinations were conducted pre-treatment at baseline (week 0) and at weeks 2, 4, 6 and 8 post-treatment, with one target lesion consistently monitored throughout the therapeutic course. Perfusion parameters were derived using SonoLiver software. The reductions (Δ) and ratios of these parameters from baseline to each subsequent follow-up time point were compared between responders and non-responders.
resultsAccording to mRECIST criteria, 83 patients (training cohort: n = 62, validation cohort: n = 21) and 56 patients (training cohort: n = 43, validation cohort: n = 13) were classified as responders and non-responders, respectively. In the training cohort, responders demonstrated significantly smaller tumor diameters compared to non-responders beginning at week 4 (4.6 ± 2.3 cm vs. 5.4 ± 2.8 cm, p = 0.027). From week 2 onward, the reductions and ratios of maximum intensity (IMAX) and area under curve (AUC) in responders were significantly higher compared to non-responders. At all time points (weeks 2, 4, and 6), the diagnostic performance of IMAX and AUC ratios was superior to that of ΔIMAX and ΔAUC. Furthermore, the AUROCs of IMAX and AUC ratios at week 4 were significantly higher than those at week 2 (Z = 3.531, p < 0.05; Z = 3.550, p < 0.05, respectively) and comparable to those at week 6 (Z = 1.596, p = 0.11; Z = 1.566, p = 0.12, respectively). In the validation cohort at week 4 post-treatment, the AUROCs of IMAX and AUC ratios were 0.896 and 0.905 (both p < 0.05), with corresponding accuracies of 85.3% and 85.3%.
conclusionThe ratios of AUC and IMAX at week 4 post-treatment may serve as reliable early predictors of treatment response to chemotherapy combined with Cetuximab in patients with CRLM.
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.