ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
The predictive value of multi-phase contrast-enhanced MRI for pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurate prediction of pathological complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) for rectal cancer is crucial for determining subsequent treatment strategies. Although studies have shown that single-phase contrast-enhanced (CE) imaging can accurately assess complete response status after NCRT, the diagnostic value of different phases in multi-phase CE MRI remains unclear. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted involving patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent total mesorectal excision (TME) after NCRT at our institution between August 2020 and October 2025. Two radiologists, blinded to individual, clinical, and histopathological information, independently assessed enhancement characteristics on multi-phase CE MRI. The diagnostic efficacy of each imaging phase for predicting pCR was compared to identify the optimal phase. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to explore independent predictors of pCR. Results: A total of 68 patients (mean age 64.8 ± 8.5 [standard deviation]) were included. The third phase of the CE (CE-3) MRI series (approximately 76 seconds) demonstrated optimal performance in predicting pCR, with an accuracy of 0.882, specificity of 0.925, and an area under the receiver (AUC) of 0.829 (95% CI: 0.708-0.950). Inter-observer agreement was favorable (κ = 0.672, 95% CI: 0.461-0.886). Compared with T2-weighted imaging combined with diffusion-weighted imaging (T2DWI), CE-3 MRI demonstrated superior accuracy in identifying treatment response (0.882 vs 0.647, p=0.002) and a superior ability to identify patients with residual tumor (Net Reclassification Index [NRI] for ypT1-4 group =0.339, 95%CI: 0.204-0.482, p<0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the yT stage based on CE-3 MRI was the sole independent predictor of pCR after NCRT (P < 0.001). Conclusion: CE MRI can identify residual tumor more precisely. In particular, CE-3 MRI series demonstrated superior diagnostic efficacy and good inter-observer agreement, which helps prevent missed diagnoses and provides clinicians with a more stable and reliable imaging assessment protocol.
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.