Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39286772›Full record

ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2024

Histopathology-validated gross tumor volume delineations of intraprostatic lesions using PSMA-positron emission tomography/multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging.

Josefine Grefve, Karin Söderkvist, Adalsteinn Gunnlaugsson, Kristina Sandgren, Joakim Jonsson, Angsana Keeratijarut Lindberg, Erik Nilsson, Jan Axelsson, Anders Bergh, Björn Zackrisson and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

19 authors.

Josefine GrefveDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Radiation Physics, Umea University, Umea, Sweden.
Karin SöderkvistDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Oncology, Umea University, Umea, Sweden.
Adalsteinn GunnlaugssonDepartment of Hematology, Oncology and Radiation Physics, Skane University Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Kristina SandgrenDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Radiation Physics, Umea University, Umea, Sweden.
Joakim JonssonDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Radiation Physics, Umea University, Umea, Sweden.
Angsana Keeratijarut LindbergDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Radiation Physics, Umea University, Umea, Sweden.
Erik NilssonDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Radiation Physics, Umea University, Umea, Sweden.
Jan AxelssonDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Radiation Physics, Umea University, Umea, Sweden.
Anders BerghDepartment of Medical Biosciences, Pathology, Umea University, Umea, Sweden.
Björn ZackrissonDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Oncology, Umea University, Umea, Sweden.
Mathieu MoreauDepartment of Hematology, Oncology and Radiation Physics, Skane University Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Camilla Thellenberg KarlssonDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Oncology, Umea University, Umea, Sweden.
Lars E OlssonDepartment of Translational Medicine, Medical Radiation Physics, Lund University, Malmo, Sweden.
Anders WidmarkDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Oncology, Umea University, Umea, Sweden.
Katrine RiklundDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Diagnostic Radiology, Umea University, Umea, Sweden.
Lennart BlomqvistDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Diagnostic Radiology, Umea University, Umea, Sweden.
Vibeke Berg LoegagerDepartment of Radiology, Copenhagen University Hospital in Herlev, Herlev, Denmark.
Sara N StrandbergDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Diagnostic Radiology, Umea University, Umea, Sweden.
Tufve NyholmDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Radiation Physics, Umea University, Umea, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and purpose: Dose escalation in external radiotherapy of prostate cancer shows promising results in terms of biochemical disease-free survival. Boost volume delineation guidelines are sparse which may cause high interobserver variability. The aim of this research was to characterize gross tumor volume (GTV) delineations based on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and prostate specific membrane antigen-positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) in relation to histopathology-validated Gleason grade 4 and 5 regions. Material and methods: The study participants were examined with [ Results: Median DSC (STAPLE) for different GTVs varied between 0.33 and 0.52. GTV Conclusion: The combined use of mpMRI or PSMA-PET/mpMRI shows promise, achieving higher DSC and lesion coverage while minimizing non-malignant tissue inclusion, in comparison to the use of a single image type with an added CTV margin.

Identifiers

PMID39286772
PMCPMC11402543

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.