Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28914599›Full record

ArticleRadiology2017

Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Quantitative Preoperative Breast MR Imaging Features Associated with Recurrence after Treatment.

Jing Luo, Brian S Johnston, Averi E Kitsch, Daniel S Hippe, Larissa A Korde, Sara Javid, Janie M Lee, Sue Peacock, Constance D Lehman, Savannah C Partridge and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Harmonization of Quantitative Parenchymal Enhancement in TJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Background parenchymal enhancement on breast MRI: A comprehensive review.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2020
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. 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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jing LuoFrom the Departments of Radiology (J.L., B.S.J., A.E.K., D.S.H., J.M.L., S.P., S.C.P., H.R.), Medicine, Division of Oncology (L.A.K.), and Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology (S.J.), University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, 825 Eastlake Ave East, Seattle, WA 98109-1023; and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.D.L.).
Brian S JohnstonFrom the Departments of Radiology (J.L., B.S.J., A.E.K., D.S.H., J.M.L., S.P., S.C.P., H.R.), Medicine, Division of Oncology (L.A.K.), and Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology (S.J.), University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, 825 Eastlake Ave East, Seattle, WA 98109-1023; and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.D.L.).
Averi E KitschFrom the Departments of Radiology (J.L., B.S.J., A.E.K., D.S.H., J.M.L., S.P., S.C.P., H.R.), Medicine, Division of Oncology (L.A.K.), and Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology (S.J.), University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, 825 Eastlake Ave East, Seattle, WA 98109-1023; and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.D.L.).
Daniel S HippeFrom the Departments of Radiology (J.L., B.S.J., A.E.K., D.S.H., J.M.L., S.P., S.C.P., H.R.), Medicine, Division of Oncology (L.A.K.), and Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology (S.J.), University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, 825 Eastlake Ave East, Seattle, WA 98109-1023; and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.D.L.).
Larissa A KordeFrom the Departments of Radiology (J.L., B.S.J., A.E.K., D.S.H., J.M.L., S.P., S.C.P., H.R.), Medicine, Division of Oncology (L.A.K.), and Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology (S.J.), University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, 825 Eastlake Ave East, Seattle, WA 98109-1023; and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.D.L.).
Sara JavidFrom the Departments of Radiology (J.L., B.S.J., A.E.K., D.S.H., J.M.L., S.P., S.C.P., H.R.), Medicine, Division of Oncology (L.A.K.), and Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology (S.J.), University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, 825 Eastlake Ave East, Seattle, WA 98109-1023; and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.D.L.).
Janie M LeeFrom the Departments of Radiology (J.L., B.S.J., A.E.K., D.S.H., J.M.L., S.P., S.C.P., H.R.), Medicine, Division of Oncology (L.A.K.), and Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology (S.J.), University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, 825 Eastlake Ave East, Seattle, WA 98109-1023; and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.D.L.).
Sue PeacockFrom the Departments of Radiology (J.L., B.S.J., A.E.K., D.S.H., J.M.L., S.P., S.C.P., H.R.), Medicine, Division of Oncology (L.A.K.), and Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology (S.J.), University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, 825 Eastlake Ave East, Seattle, WA 98109-1023; and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.D.L.).
Constance D LehmanFrom the Departments of Radiology (J.L., B.S.J., A.E.K., D.S.H., J.M.L., S.P., S.C.P., H.R.), Medicine, Division of Oncology (L.A.K.), and Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology (S.J.), University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, 825 Eastlake Ave East, Seattle, WA 98109-1023; and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.D.L.).
Savannah C PartridgeFrom the Departments of Radiology (J.L., B.S.J., A.E.K., D.S.H., J.M.L., S.P., S.C.P., H.R.), Medicine, Division of Oncology (L.A.K.), and Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology (S.J.), University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, 825 Eastlake Ave East, Seattle, WA 98109-1023; and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.D.L.).
Habib RahbarFrom the Departments of Radiology (J.L., B.S.J., A.E.K., D.S.H., J.M.L., S.P., S.C.P., H.R.), Medicine, Division of Oncology (L.A.K.), and Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology (S.J.), University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, 825 Eastlake Ave East, Seattle, WA 98109-1023; and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.D.L.).
Seattle Cancer Care Alliance · US

Funding

MRI Characterization of Biological Risk of Ductal Carcinoma in SituR01CA203883 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI RAHBAR, HABIBOLLAH · 2017 to 2021
$1.8M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA203883
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose To investigate whether specific imaging features on breast magnetic resonance (MR) images are associated with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) recurrence risk after definitive treatment. Materials and Methods Patients with DCIS who underwent preoperative dynamic contrast material-enhanced (DCE) MR imaging between 2004 and 2014 with ipsilateral recurrence more than 6 months after definitive surgical treatment were retrospectively identified. For each patient, a control subject with DCIS that did not recur was identified and matched on the basis of clinical, histopathologic, and treatment features known to affect recurrence risk. On DCE MR images, lesion characteristics (longest diameter, functional tumor volume [FTV], peak percentage enhancement [PE], peak signal enhancement ratio [SER], and washout fraction) and normal tissue features (background parenchymal enhancement [BPE] volume, mean BPE) were quantitatively measured. MR imaging features were compared between patients and control subjects by using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, with adjustment for multiple comparisons. Results Of 415 subjects with DCIS who underwent preoperative MR imaging, 14 experienced recurrence and 11 had an identifiable matching control subject (final cohort, 11 patients and 11 control subjects). Median time to recurrence was 14 months, and median follow-up for control subjects was 102 months. When compared with matched control subjects, patients with DCIS recurrence exhibited significantly greater FTV (median, 9.3 cm

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Intraductal, NoninfiltratingFemaleHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedIncidenceMagnetic Resonance ImagingMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPreoperative CarePrognosisReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID28914599
PMCPMC5708288
OpenAlexW2755976460

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.