ArticleThe British journal of radiology2016
Arterial input functions in dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: which model performs best when assessing breast cancer response?
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantitative transport mapping (QTM) for differentiating benign and malignant breast lesion: Comparison with traditional kinetics modeling and semi-quantitative enhancement curve characteristics.Magnetic resonance imaging · 2022Article
- Differentiation between glioblastoma and primary CNS lymphoma: application of DCE-MRI parameters based on arterial input function obtained from DSC-MRI.European radiology · 2021Article
- The Constantly Evolving Role of Medical Image Processing in Oncology: From Traditional Medical Image Processing to Imaging Biomarkers and Radiomics.Journal of imaging · 2021Article
- Enhancement-constrained acceleration: A robust reconstruction framework in breast DCE-MRI.PloS one · 2021Article
- Article
- The Effect of Registration on Voxel-Wise Tofts Model Parameters and Uncertainties from DCE-MRI of Early-Stage Breast Cancer Patients Using 3DSlicer.Journal of digital imaging · 2020Article
- Preclinical Molecular Imaging for Precision Medicine in Breast Cancer Mouse Models.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2019Review
- Patient-based 4D digital breast phantom for perfusion contrast-enhanced breast CT imaging.Medical physics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the performance of six models of population arterial input function (AIF) in the setting of primary breast cancer and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). The ability to fit patient dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) data, provide physiological plausible data and detect pathological response was assessed.
methodsQuantitative DCE-MRI parameters were calculated for 27 patients at baseline and after 2 cycles of NAC for 6 AIFs. Pathological complete response detection was compared with change in these parameters from a reproduction cohort of 12 patients using the Bland-Altman approach and receiver-operating characteristic analysis.
resultsThere were fewer fit failures pre-NAC for all models, with the modified Fritz-Hansen having the fewest pre-NAC (3.6%) and post-NAC (18.8%), contrasting with the femoral artery AIF (19.4% and 43.3%, respectively). Median transfer constant values were greatest for the Weinmann function and also showed greatest reductions with treatment (-68%). Reproducibility (r) was the lowest for the Weinmann function (r = -49.7%), with other AIFs ranging from r = -27.8 to -39.2%.
conclusionUsing the best performing AIF is essential to maximize the utility of quantitative DCE-MRI parameters in predicting response to NAC treatment. Applying our criteria, the modified Fritz-Hansen and cosine bolus approximated Parker AIF models performed best. The Fritz-Hansen and biexponential approximated Parker AIFs performed less well, and the Weinmann and femoral artery AIFs are not recommended. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: We demonstrate that using the most appropriate AIF can aid successful prediction of response to NAC in breast cancer.
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.