Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19070222›Full record

ReviewMedical physics2008

Breast cancer imaging: a perspective for the next decade.

Andrew Karellas, Srinivasan Vedantham

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medical physics, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 159 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. A literature review on the imaging methods for breast cancer.International journal of physiology, pathophysiology and pharmacology · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Computer-aided assessment of tumor grade for breast cancer in ultrasound images.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2015
    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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Andrew KarellasDepartment of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA 01655, USA. andrew.karellas@umassmed.edu
Srinivasan Vedantham
University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School · US

Funding

New Technology for Computed RadiographyR01EB004015 · NIBIB · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI KARELLAS, ANDREW · 2005 to 2008
$2.3M
DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY HIGH RESOLUTION FLAT PANEL IMAGERR01EB002123 · NIBIB · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI KARELLAS, ANDREW · 2003 to 2003
$506k
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB002123NIBIB NIH HHS R01-EB002123NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB004015NIBIB NIH HHS R01-EB004015
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast imaging is largely indicated for detection, diagnosis, and clinical management of breast cancer and for evaluation of the integrity of breast implants. In this work, a prospective view of techniques for breast cancer detection and diagnosis is provided based on an assessment of current trends. The potential role of emerging techniques that are under various stages of research and development is also addressed. It appears that the primary imaging tool for breast cancer screening in the next decade will be high-resolution, high-contrast, anatomical x-ray imaging with or without depth information. MRI and ultrasonography will have an increasingly important adjunctive role for imaging high-risk patients and women with dense breasts. Pilot studies with dedicated breast CT have demonstrated high-resolution three-dimensional imaging capabilities, but several technological barriers must be overcome before clinical adoption. Radionuclide based imaging techniques and x-ray imaging with intravenously injected contrast offer substantial potential as a diagnostic tools and for evaluation of suspicious lesions. Developing optical and electromagnetic imaging techniques hold significant potential for physiologic information and they are likely to be of most value when integrated with or adjunctively used with techniques that provide anatomic information. Experimental studies with breast specimens suggest that phase-sensitive x-ray imaging techniques can provide edge enhancement and contrast improvement but more research is needed to evaluate their potential role in clinical breast imaging. From the technological perspective, in addition to improvements within each modality, there is likely to be a trend towards multi-modality systems that combine anatomic with physiologic information. We are also likely to transition from a standardized screening, where all women undergo the same imaging exam (mammography), to selection of a screening modality or modalities based an individual-risk or other classification.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsContrast MediaHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMammographyRadiographic Image EnhancementRadionuclide ImagingUltrasonographyContrast Media

Identifiers

PMID19070222
PMCPMC2673595
OpenAlexW2010351317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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 OpenQuestion graph.