ReviewKorean journal of radiology2026
Updates on Imaging Assessment of Pancreatic Cancer for Determining Anatomic and Biologic Resectability.
Review in Korean journal of radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
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
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a highly lethal malignancy. Imaging plays a pivotal role in the diagnosis and management of patients with PDAC, with treatment strategies largely guided by the tumor stage and resectability at initial diagnosis. The pancreatic CT protocol is the preferred first-line imaging modality, while MRI and PET/CT serve as problem-solving tools. In non-metastatic PDAC, anatomical resectability is mainly determined by the extent of tumor-vessel contact and is categorized as resectable, borderline resectable, or locally advanced disease. Although treatment decisions have traditionally relied on anatomical resectability, a growing body of evidence has highlighted the limitations of this approach. Consequently, an expanded concept of resectability that incorporates anatomical, biological, and host-related conditional factors has emerged. Potential biomarkers that reflect tumor biology include carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels, imaging tumor phenotype, lymph node status, and metabolic activity on PET/CT. Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) is widely used to treat borderline resectable or locally advanced disease. However, radiological restaging after NAT remains challenging and tends to overestimate vascular invasion, probably because imaging cannot reliably differentiate viable tumors from post-treatment fibrosis. In this context, biological factors may provide incremental value for treatment-response assessment. This review provides an updated overview of imaging techniques, assessments of anatomical resectability, challenges in radiological restaging after NAT, and biological and conditional factors that may enable more refined risk stratification in patients with PDAC.
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.