Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37709352›Full record

SynthesisAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2023

Performance of Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System (NI-RADS) for Diagnosis of Recurrence of Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Akira Baba, Ryo Kurokawa, Mariko Kurokawa, Takafumi Yanagisawa, Ashok Srinivasan

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. NI-RADS in posttreatment head and neck cancer surveillance: a framework for standardized imaging with clinical impact.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026
    Review
  8. Diagnostic Performance of Ultrasound in Neck Node NI-RADS Category 2.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2025
    Article
  9. 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

5 authors.

Akira BabaFrom the Division of Neuroradiology (A.B., R.K., M.K., A.S.), Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan akirababa0120@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-6913-5307
Ryo KurokawaFrom the Division of Neuroradiology (A.B., R.K., M.K., A.S.), Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.ORCID 0000-0002-1186-8900
Mariko KurokawaFrom the Division of Neuroradiology (A.B., R.K., M.K., A.S.), Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.ORCID 0000-0002-3907-9188
Takafumi YanagisawaDepartment of Urology (T.Y.), The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-7410-0712
Ashok SrinivasanFrom the Division of Neuroradiology (A.B., R.K., M.K., A.S.), Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.ORCID 0000-0002-4400-1959

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System (NI-RADS) is a reporting template used in head and neck cancer posttreatment follow-up imaging. PURPOSE: Our aim was to evaluate the pooled detection rates of the recurrence of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma based on each NI-RADS category and to compare the diagnostic accuracy between NI-RADS 2 and 3 cutoffs. DATA SOURCES: The MEDLINE, Scopus, and EMBASE databases were searched. STUDY SELECTION: This systematic review identified 7 studies with a total of 694 patients (1233 lesions) that were eligible for the meta-analysis. DATA ANALYSIS: The meta-analysis of pooled recurrence detection rate estimates for each NI-RADS category and the diagnostic accuracy of recurrence with NI-RADS 3 or 2 as the cutoff was performed. DATA SYNTHESIS: The estimated recurrence rates in each category for primary lesions were 74.4% for NI-RADS 3, 29.0% for NI-RADS 2, and 4.2% for NI-RADS 1. The estimated recurrence rates in each category for cervical lymph nodes were 73.3% for NI-RADS 3, 14.3% for NI-RADS 2, and 3.5% for NI-RADS 1. The area under the curve of the summary receiver operating characteristic for recurrence detection with NI-RADS 3 as the cutoff was 0.887 and 0.983, respectively, higher than 0.869 and 0.919 for the primary sites and cervical lymph nodes, respectively, with NI-RADS 2 as the cutoff. LIMITATIONS: Given the heterogeneity of the data of the studies, the conclusions should be interpreted with caution.

conclusionsThis meta-analysis revealed estimated recurrence rates for each NI-RADS category for primary lesions and cervical lymph nodes and showed that NI-RADS 3 has a high diagnostic performance for detecting recurrence.

Indexed as

Head and Neck NeoplasmsData SystemsHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingResearch DesignROC CurveSquamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and Neck

Identifiers

PMID37709352
PMCPMC10549942

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.