ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2016
Assessing Detection, Discrimination, and Risk of Breast Cancer According to Anisotropy Parameters of Diffusion Tensor Imaging.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Performance of Diffusion Tensor Imaging for Characterizing Breast Tumors: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Pooled it
- Article
- Clinical utility of abbreviated breast MRI based on diffusion tensor imaging in patients underwent breast conservative therapy.La Radiologia medica · 2023Article
- Clinical experience of tensor-valued diffusion encoding for microstructure imaging by diffusional variance decomposition in patients with breast cancer.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2022Article
- Diffusion Breast MRI: Current Standard and Emerging Techniques.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
- Triexponential Diffusion Analysis of Diffusion-weighted Imaging for Breast Ductal Carcinoma in Situ and Invasive Ductal Carcinoma.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2021Article
- Diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging of breast cancer: associations between diffusion metrics and histological prognostic factors.European radiology · 2018Article
- Relationship Between Histone Deacetylase 3 (HDAC3) and Breast Cancer.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2018Article
- Decreasing Eukaryotic Initiation Factor 3C (EIF3C) Suppresses Proliferation and Stimulates Apoptosis in Breast Cancer Cell Lines Through Mammalian Target of Rapamycin (mTOR) Pathway.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2017Article
- Microstructural models for diffusion MRI in breast cancer and surrounding stroma: an ex vivo study.NMR in biomedicine · 2017Article
- Diffusion Tensor Imaging for Assessment of Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients With Breast Cancer.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to investigate whether the anisotropy parameters are helpful in the detection and discrimination of breast cancers, and to determine its value in predicting the risk of cancers. MATERIAL AND METHODS There were 56 patients with 56 lesions (34 malignant, 22 benign) included in the study. DTI was performed in every patient and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), fractional anisotropy (FA), and eigenvalues E1, E2, and E3 were measured in every lesion and the normal breast tissue. RESULTS ADC, FA, and eigenvalues of E1, E2, E3, and E1-E3 in breast cancers were all significantly lower than in normal tissue (P<0.001 for all) with mean reduction of (32 ± 17)%, (24 ± 13)%, (33 ± 19)%, (32 ± 17)%, (31 ± 18)%, and (37 ± 20)% for ADC, FA, E1, E2, E3, and E1-E3, respectively. These parameters were also statistically lower in cancers than in benign lesions (P<0.01 for all), except FA (P>0.05). ADC, E1, E2, and E3 were very similar in discriminating breast cancers and benign lesions, with area under the curve (AUC) 0.885-0.898, sensitivity 73.5-85.3%, and specificity 90.9-100%. CONCLUSIONS ADC, E1, E2, E3, and E1-E3 are much lower in breast cancers than in normal tissue and benign lesions. The reduction of ADC, E1, E2, E3, and E1-E3 of a mass in the breast is highly associated with the risk of breast cancer, but the FA has no utility in breast cancer risk prediction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.