Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28121639›Full record

ArticleInvestigative radiology2017

Ultrasound Tomography Evaluation of Breast Density: A Comparison With Noncontrast Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Elizabeth A M OʼFlynn, Jeremie Fromageau, Araminta E Ledger, Alessandro Messa, Ashley DʼAquino, Minouk J Schoemaker, Maria Schmidt, Neb Duric, Anthony J Swerdlow, Jeffrey C Bamber

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

10 authors.

Elizabeth A M OʼFlynnFrom the *Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre; †Joint Department of Physics, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust; ‡Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust; §Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom; ∥Delphinus Medical Technologies, Karmanos Cancer Institute, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI; and ¶Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, and Division of Breast Cancer Research Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom.
Jeremie Fromageau
Araminta E Ledger
Alessandro Messa
Ashley DʼAquino
Minouk J Schoemaker
Maria Schmidt
Neb Duric
Anthony J Swerdlow
Jeffrey C Bamber

Funding

Cancer Research UK 16464Department of Health TRF-2013-06-003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesUltrasound tomography (UST) is an emerging whole-breast 3-dimensional imaging technique that obtains quantitative tomograms of speed of sound of the entire breast. The imaged parameter is the speed of sound which is used as a surrogate measure of density at each voxel and holds promise as a method to evaluate breast density without ionizing radiation. This study evaluated the technique of UST and compared whole-breast volume averaged speed of sound (VASS) with MR percent water content from noncontrast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MATERIALS AND

methodsForty-three healthy female volunteers (median age, 40 years; range, 29-59 years) underwent bilateral breast UST and MRI using a 2-point Dixon technique. Reproducibility of VASS was evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis. Volume averaged speed of sound and MR percent water were evaluated and compared using Pearson correlation coefficient.

resultsThe mean ± standard deviation VASS measurement was 1463 ± 29 m s (range, 1434-1542 m s). There was high similarity between right (1464 ± 30 m s) and left (1462 ± 28 m s) breasts (P = 0.113) (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.98). Mean MR percent water content was 35.7% ± 14.7% (range, 13.2%-75.3%), with small but significant differences between right and left breasts (36.3% ± 14.9% and 35.1% ± 14.7%, respectively; P = 0.004). There was a very strong correlation between VASS and MR percent water density (r = 0.96, P < 0.0001).

conclusionsUltrasound tomography holds promise as a reliable and reproducible 3-dimensional technique to provide a surrogate measure of breast density and correlates strongly with MR percent water content.

Indexed as

AdultBreastBreast DensityFemaleHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalMagnetic Resonance ImagingMammographyMiddle AgedProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsTomographyUltrasonography, Mammary

Identifiers

PMID28121639
PMCPMC5417582

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.