Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41617831›Full record

Observational studyEuropean radiology2026

The predictive value of MR cytometry in histological differentiation of rectal cancer: an exploratory study.

Qing Zhao, Diwei Shi, Hongxia Zhong, Chaoyang Jin, Zongshu Wang, Zhuo Shi, Lin Li, Bingjing Wang, Yueluan Jiang, Thorsten Feiweier and 3 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07107815 (A Study On The Prediction of Neoadjuvant Efficacy And Heterogeneity For Rectal Cancer Based On MR Cytometry Imaging and Deep-radiomics), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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.

NCT07107815 enrolling by invitationnot on this map

A Study On The Prediction of Neoadjuvant Efficacy And Heterogeneity For Rectal Cancer Based On MR Cytometry Imaging and Deep-radiomics

TypeobservationalSponsorCancer Institute and Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical SciencesRan2025 to 2028Enrolled250ConditionsRectal Cancer, Adenocarcinoma
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

13 authors.

Qing Zhao *Department of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Diwei Shi *Research Institute of Tsinghua University in Shenzhen, Shenzhen, China.
Hongxia Zhong *Department of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Chaoyang JinVanderbilt University Institute of Imaging Science, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Zongshu WangCenter for Biomedical Imaging Research, School of Biomedical Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China.
Zhuo ShiDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Lin LiDepartment of Pathology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Bingjing WangSchool of Information Science and Technology, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing, China.
Yueluan JiangMR Research Collaboration Team, Siemens Healthineers Ltd, Beijing, China.
Thorsten FeiweierResearch & Clinical Translation, MagneticResonance, Siemens Healthineers AG, Erlangen, Germany.
Junzhong XuVanderbilt University Institute of Imaging Science, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Hua GuoCenter for Biomedical Imaging Research, School of Biomedical Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China. huaguo@mail.tsinghua.edu.cn.
Hongmei ZhangDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. zhanghongmei1973@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6421-4126

Funding

Beijing Natural Science Foundation 7244398CAMS Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences (CIFMS) 2025-I2M-C&T-B-063China Postdoctoral Science Foundation 2025M77292Fundamental Research Program of Shanxi Province 202403021211143National science Foundation of China-Youth Fund 2024-NSFC-62401329
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo investigate and compare the diagnostic value of different MR cytometry methods in predicting histological differentiation of rectal tumors. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis prospective study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT07107815) enrolled eligible patients with rectal cancer from March 2025 to July 2025. All patients underwent rectal MRI with oscillating gradient spin-echo and pulsed gradient spin-echo sequences. Microstructural parameters were obtained from three different MR cytometry methods. Based on pathological results, rectal tumors were classified as poor differentiation and well/moderate differentiation. Intergroup comparison was conducted using Mann-Whitney U-test. The diagnostic value of imaging metrics, including microstructural parameters and apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs), in distinguishing rectal cancers with different histological differentiation was evaluated by logistic regression analysis.

resultsA total of 86 patients were included (mean age: 60.5 ± 10.7 years; male proportion: 66.3%; maximal tumor diameter: 38.7 ± 11.1 mm), including 37 with poor differentiation, 49 with well/moderate differentiation. Intracellular volume fraction and cellularity were higher (p < 0.0001), while extracellular diffusivity, water exchange rate constant, and ADC metrics were lower (p-values from 0.01 to < 0.0001) in the poor-differentiation group. Among the classifiers based on a single imaging metric, intracellular volume fraction provided the highest areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC = 0.812). Clinical performance of the combined regression models incorporating microstructural parameters and ADC metrics (AUC = 0.883) was significantly superior to the conventional ADC measurement (AUC = 0.795).

conclusionMR cytometry provides additional information over ADC measurements in identifying histological differentiation grades of rectal cancer; the integration of MR cytometry into clinical scans may improve the diagnostic performance of rectal MRI. KEY POINTS: Question Microstructural parameters obtained from MR cytometry methods and apparent diffusion coefficients showed significant differences between rectal tumors with different histological differentiation grades. Findings The combined regression models, including both microstructural parameters and apparent diffusion coefficient metrics, provided a significantly higher value than the conventional PGSE-based ADC measurement. Clinical relevance Incorporating transcytolemmal water exchange into biophysical modeling can further improve the clinical performance over the impermeable model.

Indexed as

Image CytometryMagnetic Resonance ImagingRectal NeoplasmsAgedDiagnosis, DifferentialDiffusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesDiffusion-weighted imagingHistological differentiationMicrostructural imagingMR cytometryRectal cancer

Identifiers

PMID41617831
PMCPMC13212393

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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 Socratic graph.