Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23304141›Full record

ArticleJournal of oncology2012

Optical imaging in breast cancer diagnosis: the next evolution.

Michel Herranz, Alvaro Ruibal

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 94 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Recent advances in nanotheranostics for triple negative breast cancer treatment.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2019
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Mixed Total Variation andComputational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2017
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Triple Negative Breast Cancer: Nanosolutions for a Big Challenge.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2015
    Article
  20. Review
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.

Michel HerranzMolecular Imaging Program, PET Radiopharmacy Unit, Molecular Imaging Group, IDIS, GALARIA-SERGAS, University Hospital Complex, Travesía de Choupana s/n., 15706 Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Alvaro Ruibal
Servicio Gallego de Salud · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast cancer is one of the most common cancers among the population of the Western world. Diagnostic methods include mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance; meanwhile, nuclear medicine techniques have a secondary role, being useful in regional assessment and therapy followup. Optical imaging is a very promising imaging technique that uses near-infrared light to assess optical properties of tissues and is expected to play an important role in breast cancer detection. Optical breast imaging can be performed by intrinsic breast tissue contrast alone (hemoglobin, water, and lipid content) or with the use of exogenous fluorescent probes that target specific molecules for breast cancer. Major advantages of optical imaging are that it does not use any radioactive components, very high sensitivity, relatively inexpensive, easily accessible, and the potential to be combined in a multimodal approach with other technologies such as mammography, ultrasound, MRI, and positron emission tomography. Moreover, optical imaging agents could, potentially, be used as "theranostics," combining the process of diagnosis and therapy.

Identifiers

PMID23304141
PMCPMC3529498
OpenAlexW1973284535

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.