The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A multicentre comparative prospective blinded analysis of EUS and MRI for screening of pancreatic cancer in high-risk individuals
Open accessAbstract
Objective: Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and MRI are promising tests to detect precursors and early-stage pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in high-risk individuals (HRIs). It is unclear which screening technique is to be preferred. We aimed to compare the efficacy of EUS and MRI in their ability to detect clinically relevant lesions in HRI. Design: Multicentre prospective study. The results of 139 asymptomatic HRI (>10-fold increased risk) undergoing first-time screening by EUS and MRI are described. Clinically relevant lesions were defined as solid lesions, main duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms and cysts ≥10 mm. Results were compared in a blinded, independent fashion. Results: Two solid lesions (mean size 9 mm) and nine cysts ≥10 mm (mean size 17 mm) were detected in nine HRI (6%). Both solid lesions were detected by EUS only and proved to be a stage I PDAC and a multifocal pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia 2. Of the nine cysts ≥10 mm, six were detected by both imaging techniques and three were detected by MRI only. The agreement between EUS and MRI for the detection of clinically relevant lesions was 55%. Of these clinically relevant lesions detected by both techniques, there was a good agreement for location and size. Conclusions: EUS and/or MRI detected clinically relevant pancreatic lesions in 6% of HRI. Both imaging techniques were complementary rather than interchangeable: contrary to EUS, MRI was found to be very sensitive for the detection of cystic lesions of any size; MRI, however, might have some important limitations with regard to the timely detection of solid lesions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
International consensus guidelines 2012 for the management of IPMN and MCN of the pancreas
Tanaka, M., Fernández-del Castillo, C., Adsay, V., Chari, S., Falconi, M., Jang, J.-Y., Kimura, W., Levy, P., Pitman, M. B., Schmidt, C. M., et al. (2012) · Pancreatology · doi:10.1016/j.pan.2012.04.004 · Cited by 2,354
Canto, M. I., Harinck, F., Hruban, R. H., Offerhaus, G. J., Poley, J.-W., Kamel, I., Nio, Y., Schulick, R. S., Bassi, C., Kluijt, I., et al. (2013) · Gut · doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2012-303108 · Cited by 784
Self-citationFrequent detection of pancreatic lesions in asymptomatic high-risk individuals
Canto, M. I., Hruban, R. H., Fishman, E. K., Kamel, I. R., Schulick, R., Zhang, Z., Topazian, M., Takahashi, N., Fletcher, J., Petersen, G., et al. (2012) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2012.01.005 · Cited by 648
The incidence of pancreatic cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers
T. H. B. C. S. G., Iqbal, J., Ragone, A., Lubinski, J., Lynch, H. T., Moller, P., Ghadirian, P., Foulkes, W. D., Armel, S., Eisen, A., et al. (2012) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1038/bjc.2012.483 · Cited by 252
Vasen, H. F. A., Wasser, M., van Mil, A., Tollenaar, R. A., Konstantinovski, M., Gruis, N. A., Bergman, W., Hes, F. J., Hommes, D. W., Offerhaus, G. J. A., et al. (2011) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2010.11.048 · Cited by 152
Research works printed but not linked: 21
- 10.3322/caac.20107 · DOI
- 10.1136/jmedgenet-2012-101277 · DOI
- Al-Sukhni W , Borgida A , Rothenmund H , et al . Screening for Pancreatic Cancer in a High-Risk Cohort: An Eight-Year Experience. J Gastrointest Surg 2011;16:771–83. doi:10.1007/s11605-011-1781-6 · DOI
- 10.7326/0003-4819-131-4-199908170-00003 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.cgh.2006.02.005 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/S1542-3565(04)00244-7 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1136/gut.2008.171611 · DOI
- 10.1038/ajg.2011.65 · DOI
- 10.1038/ajg.2009.276 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-09-3209 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-0403 · DOI
- 10.1136/jmg.2004.028829 · DOI
- 10.1093/jnci/94.18.1358 · DOI
- 10.1136/jmg.2009.073429 · DOI
- 10.1136/gut.2006.108456 · DOI
- 10.2307/2529310 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/S0016-5107(02)70092-8 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10689-010-9414-x · DOI · Paper page
- Shin, 2012, Radial versus linear and second look endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) improved detection of pancreatic lesions: a randomized tandem study, Gastrointest Endosc, 75, 131, 10.1016/j.gie.2012.04.037 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.bpg.2009.06.008 · DOI
- 10.1055/s-0033-1344956 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kleeff, J., Korc, M., Apte, M., La Vecchia, C., Johnson, C. D., Biankin, A. V., Neale, R. E., Tempero, M., Tuveson, D. A., Hruban, R. H., et al. (2016) · Nature Reviews Disease Primers · doi:10.1038/nrdp.2016.22 · Cited by 1,982
Lin, J. S., Bowles, E. J. A., Williams, S. B., & Morrison, C. C. (2017) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2017.0562 · Cited by 1,082
Goggins, M., Overbeek, K. A., Brand, R., Syngal, S., Del Chiaro, M., Bartsch, D. K., Bassi, C., Carrato, A., Farrell, J., Fishman, E. K., et al. (2020) · Gut · doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2019-319352 · Cited by 659
Self-citationMultidisciplinary standards of care and recent progress in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma
Grossberg, A. J., Chu, L. C. H., Deig, C. R., Fishman, E. K., Hwang, W. L., Maitra, A., Marks, D. L., Mehta, A., Nabavizadeh, N., Simeone, D. M., et al. (2020) · CA A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.21626 · Cited by 500
US Preventive Services Task Force, Owens, D. K., Davidson, K. W., Krist, A. H., Barry, M. J., Cabana, M., Caughey, A. B., Curry, S. J., Doubeni, C. A., Epling, J. W., et al. (2019) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2019.10232 · Cited by 419
Metadata
- Authors
- Harinck, F., Konings, I. C. A. W., Kluijt, I., Poley, J. W., van Hooft, J. E., van Dullemen, H. M., Nio, C. Y., Krak, N. C., Hermans, J. J., Aalfs, C. M., Wagner, A., Sijmons, R. H., Biermann, K., van Eijck, C. H., Gouma, D. J., Dijkgraaf, M. G. W., Fockens, P., & Bruno, M. J.
- Affiliations
- Erasmus MC (NL)
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute (NL)
- Amsterdam University Medical Centers (NL)
- University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
- Radboud University Medical Center (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Harinck, F
- ORCID
- Venue
- Gut
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2015-05-18
- Volume
- 65
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1505-1513
- ISSN
- 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-3288
- OpenAlex
- W1907808487
- Cited by
- 185
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 3
- FWCI
- 7.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- pure.amsterdamumc.nl
- Licence
- other-oa
- Locations
- Gut (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
- Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- ZonMw (120520016)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › MRI in cancer diagnosis
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
- Keywords
- pancreatic cancer screening, endoscopic ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, high-risk individuals, intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm, pancreatic cysts, pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia, solid pancreatic lesions, diagnostic agreement, early cancer detection
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Netherlands, Pancreas, Pancreatic Cyst, Pancreatic Neoplasms, Prospective Studies, Cohort Studies, Endosonography, Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal, Early Detection of Cancer, Comparative Effectiveness Research, Asymptomatic Diseases
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
