ArticleUltrasound in medicine & biology2019
A Quantitative Ultrasound-Based Multi-Parameter Classifier for Breast Masses.
Article in Ultrasound in medicine & biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- The Role of Quantitative Ultrasound in Monitoring Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer: A Narrative Review.Cancers · 2025Review
- Spectral-based Quantitative Ultrasound Imaging Processing Techniques: Comparisons of RF Versus IQ Approaches.Ultrasonic imaging · 2024Article
- From bedside to portable and wearable: development of a conformable ultrasound patch for deep breast tissue imaging.Molecular oncology · 2023Article
- Association between papillary thyroid carcinoma and cervical lymph node metastasis based on ultrasonic radio frequency signals.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Recent Advances in Attenuation Estimation.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2023Article
- Prediction of clinical response to neoadjuvant therapy in advanced breast cancer by baseline B-mode ultrasound, shear-wave elastography, and pathological information.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Machine learning-enabled quantitative ultrasound techniques for tissue differentiation.Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001) · 2022Article
- Automated Breast Volume Scanner (ABVS)-Based Radiomic Nomogram: A Potential Tool for Reducing Unnecessary Biopsies of BI-RADS 4 Lesions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Combination of shear wave elastography and BI-RADS in identification of solid breast masses.BMC medical imaging · 2021Article
- Analytic Global Regularized Backscatter Quantitative Ultrasound.IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control · 2021Article
- Medical imaging and nuclear medicine: a Lancet Oncology Commission.The Lancet. Oncology · 2021Review
- Effects of acoustic nonlinearity on pulse-echo attenuation coefficient estimation from tissue-mimicking phantoms.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2020Article
- Optimization of Ultrasound Backscatter Spectroscopy to Assess Neurotoxic Effects of Anesthesia in the Newborn Non-human Primate Brain.Ultrasound in medicine & biology · 2020Article
- Improved evaluation of backscatter characteristics of soft tissue using high-frequency annular array.Japanese journal of applied physics (2008) · 2020Article
- Classification of Benign and Malignant Breast Tumors Using H-Scan Ultrasound Imaging.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This manuscript reports preliminary results obtained by combining estimates of two or three (among seven) quantitative ultrasound (QUS) parameters in a model-free, multi-parameter classifier to differentiate breast carcinomas from fibroadenomas (the most common benign solid tumor). Forty-three patients scheduled for core biopsy of a suspicious breast mass were recruited. Radiofrequency echo signal data were acquired using clinical breast ultrasound systems equipped with linear array transducers. The reference phantom method was used to obtain system-independent estimates of the specific attenuation (ATT), the average backscatter coefficients, the effective scatterer diameter (ESD) and an effective scatterer diameter heterogeneity index (ESDHI) over regions of interest within each mass. In addition, the envelope amplitude signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), the Nakagami shape parameter, m, and the maximum collapsed average (maxCA) of the generalized spectrum were also computed. Classification was performed using the minimum Mahalanobis distance to the centroids of the training classes and tested against biopsy results. Classification performance was evaluated with the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The best performance with a two-parameter classifier used the ESD and ESDHI and resulted in an area under the ROC curve of 0.98 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.95-1.00). Classification performance improved with three parameters (ATT, ESD and ESDHI) yielding an area under the ROC curve of 0.999 (0.995-1.000). These results suggest that system-independent QUS parameters, when combined in a model-free classifier, are a promising tool to characterize breast tumors. A larger study is needed to further test this idea.
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.