Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25986460›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research : BCR2015

Quantitative assessment of background parenchymal enhancement in breast MRI predicts response to risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy: preliminary evaluation in a cohort of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Shandong Wu, Susan P Weinstein, Michael J DeLeo, Emily F Conant, Jinbo Chen, Susan M Domchek, Despina Kontos

RetractedErratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
6.2field-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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. New Frontiers in Breast Cancer Imaging: The Rise of AI.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Clinical Artificial Intelligence Applications: Breast Imaging.Radiologic clinics of North America · 2021
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Harmonization of Quantitative Parenchymal Enhancement in TJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2020
    Article
  20. Background parenchymal enhancement on breast MRI: A comprehensive review.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2020
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Shandong WuDepartment of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 1 Silverstein Building, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. wus3@upmc.edu.
Susan P WeinsteinDepartment of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 1 Silverstein Building, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. susan.weinstein@uphs.upenn.edu.
Michael J DeLeoDepartment of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 1 Silverstein Building, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. michael.deleo@uphs.upenn.edu.
Emily F ConantDepartment of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 1 Silverstein Building, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. emily.conant@uphs.upenn.edu.
Jinbo ChenDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 203 Blockley Hall, 423 Guardian Drive, Philadelphia, PA, USA. jinboche@mail.med.upenn.edu.
Susan M DomchekDepartment of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Civic Center Boulevard, 3 West Pavilion, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. susan.domchek@uphs.upenn.edu.
Despina KontosDepartment of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 1 Silverstein Building, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. despina.kontos@uphs.upenn.edu.
Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · USUniversity of Pittsburgh · US

Funding

UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA CAN CTR SUPPORT GRANTP30CA016520 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI SHELLEY L BERGER · 1985 to 2026
$222.3M
University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR000005 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI REIS, STEVEN E · 2012 to 2015
$50.8M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000005NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016520
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWe present a fully automated method for deriving quantitative measures of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) from breast dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) and perform a preliminary evaluation of these measures to assess the effect of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) in a cohort of breast cancer susceptibility gene 1/2 (BRCA1/2) mutation carriers.

methodsBreast DCE-MRI data from 50 BRCA1/2 carriers were retrospectively analyzed in compliance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and with institutional review board approval. Both the absolute (| |) and relative (%) measures of BPE and fibroglandular tissue (FGT) were computed from the MRI scans acquired before and after RRSO. These pre-RRSO and post-RRSO measures were compared using paired Student's t test. The area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) was used to evaluate the performance of relative changes in the BPE and FGT measures in predicting breast cancer that developed in these women after the RRSO surgery.

resultsFor the 44 women who did not develop breast cancer after RRSO, the absolute volume of BPE and FGT had a significant decrease (P < 0.05) post-RRSO, whereas for the 6 women who developed breast cancer, there were no significant changes in these measures. Higher values in all BPE and FGT measures were also observed post-RRSO for the women who developed breast cancer, compared with women who did not. Relative changes in BPE percentage were most predictive of women who developed breast cancer after RRSO (P < 0.05), whereas combining BPE percentage and |FGT| yielded an AUC of 0.80, higher than BPE percentage (AUC = 0.78) or |FGT| (AUC = 0.66) alone (both P > 0.02).

conclusionsQuantitative measures of BPE and FGT are different before and after RRSO, and their relative changes are associated with prediction of developing breast cancer, potentially indicative of women who are more susceptible to develop breast cancer after RRSO in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Indexed as

Genes, BRCA1Genes, BRCA2HeterozygoteMagnetic Resonance ImagingMutationAdultAgedArea Under CurveBreast NeoplasmsCohort StudiesFemaleHumansImage EnhancementMiddle AgedModels, StatisticalOvariectomy

Identifiers

PMID25986460
PMCPMC4481125
OpenAlexW1651094700

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.