ArticleInsights into imaging2026
Post-therapy imaging of adult brain tumours: patterns, pitfalls, and practical framework.
Article in Insights into imaging, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Post-therapy imaging of adult brain tumours is among the most challenging tasks in neuroradiology. Distinguishing true tumour progression from treatment-related changes-including pseudoprogression, radiation necrosis, and atypical immunotherapy responses-requires integration of imaging timing, morphology, and clinical context. This review synthesises current literature into a practical, treatment-based framework, addressing gliomas and metastases separately and, within each, organising findings by treatment modality-surgical resection, chemoradiotherapy, stereotactic radiosurgery, systemic therapy (targeted and anti-angiogenic agents, and immunotherapy), and locoregional techniques. For each treatment context, we outline expected imaging evolution, characteristic patterns of treatment effect, key features differentiating these from tumour progression, and the role of MRI and nuclear medicine techniques. The review concludes with a practical reporting framework built around treatment received and time since treatment, integrating clinical context, imaging pattern, and interval change to support radiology reporting across diverse therapeutic combinations. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Recognising treatment-specific imaging pitfalls-pseudoprogression, pseudoresponse, radiation injury, and immune-related changes-is essential for accurate response assessment and prevents misdirected management in neuro-oncology. KEY POINTS: Distinguishing true tumour progression from treatment-related change on post-therapy brain MRI is a frequent diagnostic challenge, because findings vary with treatment type and timing. Pseudoprogression is context-dependent-its definition, timing, and morphology differ across chemoradiotherapy, IDH-mutant glioma, stereotactic radiosurgery, and immunotherapy, so no single rule fits all settings.
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.