MRI-based contrast clearance analysis shows high differentiation accuracy between radiation-induced reactions and progressive disease after cranial radiotherapy
Pseudoprogression (PsP) or radiation necrosis (RN) may frequently occur after cranial radiotherapy and show a similar imaging pattern compared with progressive disease (PD). We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging-based contrast clearance analysis (CCA) in this cli...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | ESMO open 2022-04, Vol.7 (2), p.100424-100424, Article 100424 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 100424 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 100424 |
container_title | ESMO open |
container_volume | 7 |
creator | Bodensohn, R. Forbrig, R. Quach, S. Reis, J. Boulesteix, A.-L. Mansmann, U. Hadi, I. Fleischmann, D.F. Mücke, J. Holzgreve, A. Albert, N.L. Ruf, V. Dorostkar, M. Corradini, S. Herms, J. Belka, C. Thon, N. Niyazi, M. |
description | Pseudoprogression (PsP) or radiation necrosis (RN) may frequently occur after cranial radiotherapy and show a similar imaging pattern compared with progressive disease (PD). We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging-based contrast clearance analysis (CCA) in this clinical setting.
Patients with equivocal imaging findings after cranial radiotherapy were consecutively included into this monocentric prospective study. CCA was carried out by software-based automated subtraction of imaging features in late versus early T1-weighted sequences after contrast agent application. Two experienced neuroradiologists evaluated CCA with respect to PsP/RN and PD being blinded for histological findings. The radiological assessment was compared with the histopathological results, and its accuracy was calculated statistically.
A total of 33 patients were included; 16 (48.5%) were treated because of a primary brain tumor (BT), and 17 (51.1%) because of a secondary BT. In one patient, CCA was technically infeasible. The accuracy of CCA in predicting the histological result was 0.84 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-0.95; one-sided P = 0.051; n = 32]. Sensitivity and specificity of CCA were 0.93 (95% CI 0.66-1.00) and 0.78 (95% CI 0.52-0.94), respectively. The accuracy in patients with secondary BTs was 0.94 (95% CI 0.71-1.00) and nonsignificantly higher compared with patients with primary BT with an accuracy of 0.73 (95% CI 0.45-0.92), P = 0.16.
In this study, CCA was a highly accurate, easy, and helpful method for distinguishing PsP or RN from PD after cranial radiotherapy, especially in patients with secondary tumors after radiosurgical treatment.
•CCA is accurate in distinguishing treatment reactions from true PD.•CCA was more accurate for irradiated metastases than primary BTs.•CCA is not feasible for lesions with no contrast media uptake. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100424 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9058918</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S205970292200045X</els_id><sourcerecordid>2636890206</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c463t-16dfe86f2a81199ddf27f71b941930d4c8c50c1c452e7a2811551991a541865b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc9u1DAQxiMEolXpGyDkI5cstuP8uyChCmilIiQEZ2tiTzZeZePgcbbat-FR8TallAsnWzPf_D57vix7LfhGcFG9222Q9t7PG8mlTCWupHqWnUtetnnNZfv8yf0suyTacc5FrVKxepmdFaVUTSPlefbry7ebvANCy4yfYgCKzIwIASaDDCYYj-SI0eDviA1uOzDr-h4DTtFBdH5iYMwSwBxZh_EOcWIB7NrK3WQXk8gBwZwKlICWzcFvAxK5AyYYYTJn0EcMzCRXB-M9wccBA8zHV9mLHkbCy4fzIvvx6eP3q-v89uvnm6sPt7lRVRFzUdkem6qX0AjRttb2su5r0bVKtAW3yjSm5EYYVUqsQSZRWSadgFKJpiq74iJ7v3LnpdujNXhaxqjn4PYQjtqD0_92JjforT_olpdNK5oEePsACP7nghT13pHBcYQJ_UJaVkXVtFzyKknVKjXBEwXsH20E16d89U6v-epTvnrNN429efrEx6E_af79A6ZFHRwGTcZhCtK6gCZq693_HX4Dek-9iA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2636890206</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>MRI-based contrast clearance analysis shows high differentiation accuracy between radiation-induced reactions and progressive disease after cranial radiotherapy</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Bodensohn, R. ; Forbrig, R. ; Quach, S. ; Reis, J. ; Boulesteix, A.-L. ; Mansmann, U. ; Hadi, I. ; Fleischmann, D.F. ; Mücke, J. ; Holzgreve, A. ; Albert, N.L. ; Ruf, V. ; Dorostkar, M. ; Corradini, S. ; Herms, J. ; Belka, C. ; Thon, N. ; Niyazi, M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Bodensohn, R. ; Forbrig, R. ; Quach, S. ; Reis, J. ; Boulesteix, A.-L. ; Mansmann, U. ; Hadi, I. ; Fleischmann, D.F. ; Mücke, J. ; Holzgreve, A. ; Albert, N.L. ; Ruf, V. ; Dorostkar, M. ; Corradini, S. ; Herms, J. ; Belka, C. ; Thon, N. ; Niyazi, M.</creatorcontrib><description>Pseudoprogression (PsP) or radiation necrosis (RN) may frequently occur after cranial radiotherapy and show a similar imaging pattern compared with progressive disease (PD). We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging-based contrast clearance analysis (CCA) in this clinical setting.
Patients with equivocal imaging findings after cranial radiotherapy were consecutively included into this monocentric prospective study. CCA was carried out by software-based automated subtraction of imaging features in late versus early T1-weighted sequences after contrast agent application. Two experienced neuroradiologists evaluated CCA with respect to PsP/RN and PD being blinded for histological findings. The radiological assessment was compared with the histopathological results, and its accuracy was calculated statistically.
A total of 33 patients were included; 16 (48.5%) were treated because of a primary brain tumor (BT), and 17 (51.1%) because of a secondary BT. In one patient, CCA was technically infeasible. The accuracy of CCA in predicting the histological result was 0.84 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-0.95; one-sided P = 0.051; n = 32]. Sensitivity and specificity of CCA were 0.93 (95% CI 0.66-1.00) and 0.78 (95% CI 0.52-0.94), respectively. The accuracy in patients with secondary BTs was 0.94 (95% CI 0.71-1.00) and nonsignificantly higher compared with patients with primary BT with an accuracy of 0.73 (95% CI 0.45-0.92), P = 0.16.
In this study, CCA was a highly accurate, easy, and helpful method for distinguishing PsP or RN from PD after cranial radiotherapy, especially in patients with secondary tumors after radiosurgical treatment.
•CCA is accurate in distinguishing treatment reactions from true PD.•CCA was more accurate for irradiated metastases than primary BTs.•CCA is not feasible for lesions with no contrast media uptake.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2059-7029</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2059-7029</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100424</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35248822</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>brain metastases ; Brain Neoplasms - radiotherapy ; Contrast Media ; glioma ; Humans ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - adverse effects ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods ; Necrosis - etiology ; Necrosis - surgery ; Original Research ; Prospective Studies ; pseudoprogression ; Radiation Injuries - diagnostic imaging ; Radiation Injuries - etiology ; Radiation Injuries - pathology ; radiation necrosis ; Radiosurgery ; stereotactic radiosurgery</subject><ispartof>ESMO open, 2022-04, Vol.7 (2), p.100424-100424, Article 100424</ispartof><rights>2022 The Authors</rights><rights>Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>2022 The Authors 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c463t-16dfe86f2a81199ddf27f71b941930d4c8c50c1c452e7a2811551991a541865b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c463t-16dfe86f2a81199ddf27f71b941930d4c8c50c1c452e7a2811551991a541865b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9058918/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9058918/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,728,781,785,886,27929,27930,53796,53798</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35248822$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bodensohn, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Forbrig, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quach, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reis, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boulesteix, A.-L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mansmann, U.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hadi, I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fleischmann, D.F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mücke, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holzgreve, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albert, N.L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ruf, V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dorostkar, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Corradini, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Herms, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Belka, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thon, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Niyazi, M.</creatorcontrib><title>MRI-based contrast clearance analysis shows high differentiation accuracy between radiation-induced reactions and progressive disease after cranial radiotherapy</title><title>ESMO open</title><addtitle>ESMO Open</addtitle><description>Pseudoprogression (PsP) or radiation necrosis (RN) may frequently occur after cranial radiotherapy and show a similar imaging pattern compared with progressive disease (PD). We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging-based contrast clearance analysis (CCA) in this clinical setting.
Patients with equivocal imaging findings after cranial radiotherapy were consecutively included into this monocentric prospective study. CCA was carried out by software-based automated subtraction of imaging features in late versus early T1-weighted sequences after contrast agent application. Two experienced neuroradiologists evaluated CCA with respect to PsP/RN and PD being blinded for histological findings. The radiological assessment was compared with the histopathological results, and its accuracy was calculated statistically.
A total of 33 patients were included; 16 (48.5%) were treated because of a primary brain tumor (BT), and 17 (51.1%) because of a secondary BT. In one patient, CCA was technically infeasible. The accuracy of CCA in predicting the histological result was 0.84 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-0.95; one-sided P = 0.051; n = 32]. Sensitivity and specificity of CCA were 0.93 (95% CI 0.66-1.00) and 0.78 (95% CI 0.52-0.94), respectively. The accuracy in patients with secondary BTs was 0.94 (95% CI 0.71-1.00) and nonsignificantly higher compared with patients with primary BT with an accuracy of 0.73 (95% CI 0.45-0.92), P = 0.16.
In this study, CCA was a highly accurate, easy, and helpful method for distinguishing PsP or RN from PD after cranial radiotherapy, especially in patients with secondary tumors after radiosurgical treatment.
•CCA is accurate in distinguishing treatment reactions from true PD.•CCA was more accurate for irradiated metastases than primary BTs.•CCA is not feasible for lesions with no contrast media uptake.</description><subject>brain metastases</subject><subject>Brain Neoplasms - radiotherapy</subject><subject>Contrast Media</subject><subject>glioma</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - adverse effects</subject><subject>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</subject><subject>Necrosis - etiology</subject><subject>Necrosis - surgery</subject><subject>Original Research</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>pseudoprogression</subject><subject>Radiation Injuries - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Radiation Injuries - etiology</subject><subject>Radiation Injuries - pathology</subject><subject>radiation necrosis</subject><subject>Radiosurgery</subject><subject>stereotactic radiosurgery</subject><issn>2059-7029</issn><issn>2059-7029</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc9u1DAQxiMEolXpGyDkI5cstuP8uyChCmilIiQEZ2tiTzZeZePgcbbat-FR8TallAsnWzPf_D57vix7LfhGcFG9222Q9t7PG8mlTCWupHqWnUtetnnNZfv8yf0suyTacc5FrVKxepmdFaVUTSPlefbry7ebvANCy4yfYgCKzIwIASaDDCYYj-SI0eDviA1uOzDr-h4DTtFBdH5iYMwSwBxZh_EOcWIB7NrK3WQXk8gBwZwKlICWzcFvAxK5AyYYYTJn0EcMzCRXB-M9wccBA8zHV9mLHkbCy4fzIvvx6eP3q-v89uvnm6sPt7lRVRFzUdkem6qX0AjRttb2su5r0bVKtAW3yjSm5EYYVUqsQSZRWSadgFKJpiq74iJ7v3LnpdujNXhaxqjn4PYQjtqD0_92JjforT_olpdNK5oEePsACP7nghT13pHBcYQJ_UJaVkXVtFzyKknVKjXBEwXsH20E16d89U6v-epTvnrNN429efrEx6E_af79A6ZFHRwGTcZhCtK6gCZq693_HX4Dek-9iA</recordid><startdate>20220401</startdate><enddate>20220401</enddate><creator>Bodensohn, R.</creator><creator>Forbrig, R.</creator><creator>Quach, S.</creator><creator>Reis, J.</creator><creator>Boulesteix, A.-L.</creator><creator>Mansmann, U.</creator><creator>Hadi, I.</creator><creator>Fleischmann, D.F.</creator><creator>Mücke, J.</creator><creator>Holzgreve, A.</creator><creator>Albert, N.L.</creator><creator>Ruf, V.</creator><creator>Dorostkar, M.</creator><creator>Corradini, S.</creator><creator>Herms, J.</creator><creator>Belka, C.</creator><creator>Thon, N.</creator><creator>Niyazi, M.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20220401</creationdate><title>MRI-based contrast clearance analysis shows high differentiation accuracy between radiation-induced reactions and progressive disease after cranial radiotherapy</title><author>Bodensohn, R. ; Forbrig, R. ; Quach, S. ; Reis, J. ; Boulesteix, A.-L. ; Mansmann, U. ; Hadi, I. ; Fleischmann, D.F. ; Mücke, J. ; Holzgreve, A. ; Albert, N.L. ; Ruf, V. ; Dorostkar, M. ; Corradini, S. ; Herms, J. ; Belka, C. ; Thon, N. ; Niyazi, M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c463t-16dfe86f2a81199ddf27f71b941930d4c8c50c1c452e7a2811551991a541865b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>brain metastases</topic><topic>Brain Neoplasms - radiotherapy</topic><topic>Contrast Media</topic><topic>glioma</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - adverse effects</topic><topic>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</topic><topic>Necrosis - etiology</topic><topic>Necrosis - surgery</topic><topic>Original Research</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>pseudoprogression</topic><topic>Radiation Injuries - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Radiation Injuries - etiology</topic><topic>Radiation Injuries - pathology</topic><topic>radiation necrosis</topic><topic>Radiosurgery</topic><topic>stereotactic radiosurgery</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bodensohn, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Forbrig, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quach, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reis, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boulesteix, A.-L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mansmann, U.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hadi, I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fleischmann, D.F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mücke, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holzgreve, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albert, N.L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ruf, V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dorostkar, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Corradini, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Herms, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Belka, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thon, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Niyazi, M.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>ESMO open</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bodensohn, R.</au><au>Forbrig, R.</au><au>Quach, S.</au><au>Reis, J.</au><au>Boulesteix, A.-L.</au><au>Mansmann, U.</au><au>Hadi, I.</au><au>Fleischmann, D.F.</au><au>Mücke, J.</au><au>Holzgreve, A.</au><au>Albert, N.L.</au><au>Ruf, V.</au><au>Dorostkar, M.</au><au>Corradini, S.</au><au>Herms, J.</au><au>Belka, C.</au><au>Thon, N.</au><au>Niyazi, M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>MRI-based contrast clearance analysis shows high differentiation accuracy between radiation-induced reactions and progressive disease after cranial radiotherapy</atitle><jtitle>ESMO open</jtitle><addtitle>ESMO Open</addtitle><date>2022-04-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>7</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>100424</spage><epage>100424</epage><pages>100424-100424</pages><artnum>100424</artnum><issn>2059-7029</issn><eissn>2059-7029</eissn><abstract>Pseudoprogression (PsP) or radiation necrosis (RN) may frequently occur after cranial radiotherapy and show a similar imaging pattern compared with progressive disease (PD). We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging-based contrast clearance analysis (CCA) in this clinical setting.
Patients with equivocal imaging findings after cranial radiotherapy were consecutively included into this monocentric prospective study. CCA was carried out by software-based automated subtraction of imaging features in late versus early T1-weighted sequences after contrast agent application. Two experienced neuroradiologists evaluated CCA with respect to PsP/RN and PD being blinded for histological findings. The radiological assessment was compared with the histopathological results, and its accuracy was calculated statistically.
A total of 33 patients were included; 16 (48.5%) were treated because of a primary brain tumor (BT), and 17 (51.1%) because of a secondary BT. In one patient, CCA was technically infeasible. The accuracy of CCA in predicting the histological result was 0.84 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-0.95; one-sided P = 0.051; n = 32]. Sensitivity and specificity of CCA were 0.93 (95% CI 0.66-1.00) and 0.78 (95% CI 0.52-0.94), respectively. The accuracy in patients with secondary BTs was 0.94 (95% CI 0.71-1.00) and nonsignificantly higher compared with patients with primary BT with an accuracy of 0.73 (95% CI 0.45-0.92), P = 0.16.
In this study, CCA was a highly accurate, easy, and helpful method for distinguishing PsP or RN from PD after cranial radiotherapy, especially in patients with secondary tumors after radiosurgical treatment.
•CCA is accurate in distinguishing treatment reactions from true PD.•CCA was more accurate for irradiated metastases than primary BTs.•CCA is not feasible for lesions with no contrast media uptake.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>35248822</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100424</doi><tpages>1</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2059-7029 |
ispartof | ESMO open, 2022-04, Vol.7 (2), p.100424-100424, Article 100424 |
issn | 2059-7029 2059-7029 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9058918 |
source | MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central |
subjects | brain metastases Brain Neoplasms - radiotherapy Contrast Media glioma Humans Magnetic Resonance Imaging - adverse effects Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods Necrosis - etiology Necrosis - surgery Original Research Prospective Studies pseudoprogression Radiation Injuries - diagnostic imaging Radiation Injuries - etiology Radiation Injuries - pathology radiation necrosis Radiosurgery stereotactic radiosurgery |
title | MRI-based contrast clearance analysis shows high differentiation accuracy between radiation-induced reactions and progressive disease after cranial radiotherapy |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-14T11%3A36%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=MRI-based%20contrast%20clearance%20analysis%20shows%20high%20differentiation%20accuracy%20between%20radiation-induced%20reactions%20and%20progressive%20disease%20after%20cranial%20radiotherapy&rft.jtitle=ESMO%20open&rft.au=Bodensohn,%20R.&rft.date=2022-04-01&rft.volume=7&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=100424&rft.epage=100424&rft.pages=100424-100424&rft.artnum=100424&rft.issn=2059-7029&rft.eissn=2059-7029&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100424&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2636890206%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2636890206&rft_id=info:pmid/35248822&rft_els_id=S205970292200045X&rfr_iscdi=true |