ArticleMedical physics2019
Quantitative assessment of breast density using transmission ultrasound tomography.
Article in Medical physics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Volumetric Quantification of Breast Tissue Composition Using Transmission Ultrasound: A Validation Study Against MRI.Ultrasound in medicine & biology · 2026Observational
- Robust Deep Learning for Pulse-Echo Speed of Sound Imaging via Time-Shift Maps.IEEE transactions on medical imaging · 2026Article
- Feasibility of tumor detection with a transmission-based microwave imaging system.Medical physics · 2025Article
- A review of ultrasound monitoring applications in agriculture.Frontiers in plant science · 2025Review
- Investigating the Use of Traveltime and Reflection Tomography for Deep Learning-Based Sound-Speed Estimation in Ultrasound Computed Tomography.IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control · 2024Article
- Breast Glandular and Ductal Volume Changes during the Menstrual Cycle: A Study in 48 Breasts Using Ultralow-Frequency Transmitted Ultrasound Tomography/Volography.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2024Article
- Breast Tomographic Ultrasound: The Spectrum from Current Dense Breast Cancer Screenings to Future Theranostic Treatments.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2024Review
- A Forward Model Incorporating Elevation-Focused Transducer Properties for 3-D Full-Waveform Inversion in Ultrasound Computed Tomography.IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control · 2023Article
- Low frequency 3D transmission ultrasound tomography: technical details and clinical implications.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2023Article
- Artificial intelligence diagnosis based on breast ultrasound imaging.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2022Article
- The Potential Role of the Fat-Glandular Interface (FGI) in Breast Carcinogenesis: Results from an Ultrasound Tomography (UST) Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Multicenter Study of Whole Breast Stiffness Imaging by Ultrasound Tomography (SoftVue) for Characterization of Breast Tissues and Masses.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Full wave 3D inverse scattering transmission ultrasound tomography in the presence of high contrast.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Whole Breast Sound Speed Measurement from US Tomography Correlates Strongly with Volumetric Breast Density from Mammography.Journal of breast imagingArticle
- A Novel Marker, Based on Ultrasound Tomography, for Monitoring Early Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.Journal of breast imagingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeBreast density is important in the evaluation of breast cancer risk. At present, breast density is evaluated using two-dimensional projections from mammography with or without tomosynthesis using either (a) subjective assessment or (b) a computer-aided approach. The purpose of this work is twofold: (a) to establish an algorithm for quantitative assessment of breast density using quantitative three-dimensional transmission ultrasound imaging; and (b) to determine how these quantitative assessments compare with both subjective and objective mammographic assessments of breast density.
methodsWe described and verified a threshold-based segmentation algorithm to give a quantitative breast density (QBD) on ultrasound tomography images of phantoms of known geometric forms. We also used the algorithm and transmission ultrasound tomography to quantitatively determine breast density by separating fibroglandular tissue from fat and skin, based on imaged, quantitative tissue characteristics, and compared the quantitative tomography segmentation results with subjective and objective mammographic assessments.
resultsQuantitative breast density (QBD) measured in phantoms demonstrates high quantitative accuracy with respect to geometric volumes with average difference of less than 0.1% of the total phantom volumes. There is a strong correlation between QBD and both subjective mammographic assessments of Breast Imaging - Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) breast composition categories and Volpara density scores - the Spearman correlation coefficients for the two comparisons were calculated to be 0.90 (95% CI: 0.71-0.96) and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.92-0.98), respectively.
conclusionsThe calculation of breast density using ultrasound tomography and the described segmentation algorithm is quantitatively accurate in phantoms and highly correlated with both subjective and Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-cleared objective assessments of breast density.
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.