The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging as a Cancer Biomarker: Consensus and Recommendations
Open accessAbstract
On May 3, 2008, a National Cancer Institute (NCI)-sponsored open consensus conference was held in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, during the 2008 International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine Meeting. Approximately 100 experts and stakeholders summarized the current understanding of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) and reached consensus on the use of DW-MRI as a cancer imaging biomarker. DW-MRI should be tested as an imaging biomarker in the context of well-defined clinical trials, by adding DW-MRI to existing NCI-sponsored trials, particularly those with tissue sampling or survival indicators. Where possible, DW-MRI measurements should be compared with histologic indices including cellularity and tissue response. There is a need for tissue equivalent diffusivity phantoms; meanwhile, simple fluid-filled phantoms should be used. Monoexponential assessments of apparent diffusion coefficient values should use two b values (>100 and between 500 and 1000 mm2/sec depending on the application). Free breathing with multiple acquisitions is superior to complex gating techniques. Baseline patient reproducibility studies should be part of study designs. Both region of interest and histogram analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements should be obtained. Standards for measurement, analysis, and display are needed. Annotated data from validation studies (along with outcome measures) should be made publicly available. Magnetic resonance imaging vendors should be engaged in this process. The NCI should establish a task force of experts (physicists, radiologists, and oncologists) to plan, organize technical aspects, and conduct pilot trials. The American College of Radiology Imaging Network infrastructure may be suitable for these purposes. There is an extraordinary opportunity for DW-MRI to evolve into a clinically valuable imaging tool, potentially important for drug development.
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
Diffusion tensor MR imaging of the human brain
Pierpaoli, C., Jezzard, P., Basser, P. J., Barnett, A., & Di Chiro, G. (1996) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiology.201.3.8939209 · Cited by 2,664
Parikh, T., Drew, S. J., Lee, V. S., Wong, S., Hecht, E. M., Babb, J. S., & Taouli, B. (2008) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2463070432 · Cited by 560
Self-citation
Cited by
Radiomics: the process and the challenges
Kumar, V., Gu, Y., Basu, S., Berglund, A., Eschrich, S. A., Schabath, M. B., Forster, K., Aerts, H. J. W. L., Dekker, A., Fenstermacher, D., et al. (2012) · Magnetic Resonance Imaging · doi:10.1016/j.mri.2012.06.010 · Cited by 2,258
“DWI has been proposed as a cancer imaging biomarker, and there are efforts to develop quality control protocols [18,19].”
BackgroundImaging biomarker roadmap for cancer studies
O'Connor, J. P. B., Aboagye, E. O., Adams, J. E., Aerts, H. J. W. L., Barrington, S. F., Beer, A. J., Boellaard, R., Bohndiek, S. E., Brady, M., Brown, G., et al. (2017) · Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1038/nrclinonc.2016.162 · Cited by 1,091
Self-citationClinical intravoxel incoherent motion and diffusion MR imaging: Past, present, and future
Iima, M., & Le Bihan, D. (2016) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2015150244 · Cited by 498
Shin, H.-C., Orton, M. R., Collins, D. J., Doran, S. J., & Leach, M. O. (2013) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2012.277 · Cited by 488
Self-citationTurkbey, B., Shah, V. P., Pang, Y., Bernardo, M., Xu, S., Kruecker, J., Locklin, J., Baccala, A. A., Rastinehad, A. R., Merino, M. J., et al. (2011) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.10100667 · Cited by 389
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Padhani, A. R., Liu, G., Mu-Koh, D., Chenevert, T. L., Thoeny, H. C., Takahara, T., Dzik-Jurasz, A., Ross, B. D., Van Cauteren, M., Collins, D., Hammoud, D. A., Rustin, G. J. S., Taouli, B., & Choyke, P. L.
- Venue
- Neoplasia
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-02
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 102-125
- ISSN
- 1476-5586 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1676308325
- Cited by
- 1,989
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 84.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging as a Cancer Biomarker: Consensus and Recommendations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1593/neo.81328
- The paper
- Padhani, A. R., Liu, G., Mu-Koh, D., Chenevert, T. L., Thoeny, H. C., Takahara, T., Dzik-Jurasz, A., Ross, B. D., Van Cauteren, M., Collins, D., Hammoud, D. A., Rustin, G. J. S., Taouli, B., & Choyke, P. L. (2009). Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging as a Cancer Biomarker: Consensus and Recommendations. Neoplasia. https://doi.org/10.1593/neo.81328
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.