ArticlePhotoacoustics2020
Lipid-weighted intraoperative photoacoustic tomography of breast tumors: Volumetric comparison to preoperative MRI.
Article in Photoacoustics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Toward noninvasive precision: a meta-analysis of photoacoustic spectroscopy in breast cancer.Lasers in medical science · 2025Pooled it
- Photoacoustic imaging: An emerging tool for intraoperative margin assessment in breast-conserving surgery.Photoacoustics · 2026Review
- Recent advancements in molecular photoacoustic tomography.JPhys photonics · 2025Review
- Application of photoacoustic computed tomography in biomedical imaging: A literature review.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2023Review
- Investigating the feasibility of a hand-held photoacoustic imaging probe for margin assessment during breast conserving surgery.Photoacoustics · 2022Article
- Biochemical "decoding" of breast ultrasound images with optoacoustic tomography fusion: First-in-human display of lipid and collagen signals on breast ultrasound.Photoacoustics · 2022Article
- Approaching closed spherical, full-view detection for photoacoustic tomography.Journal of biomedical optics · 2022Article
- Photoacoustic and magnetic resonance imaging-based gene and photothermal therapy using mesoporous nanoagents.Bioactive materials · 2022Article
- Optical Resolution Photoacoustic Microscopy Imaging in the Detection of Early Oral Cancer under Image Reconstruction Algorithm.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With a lifetime risk of 1 in 8, breast cancer continues to be a major concern for women and their physicians. The optimal treatment of the disease depends on the stage of the cancer at diagnosis, which is typically assessed using medical imaging. However, currently employed imaging systems for breast tumor measurement rarely agree perfectly. Our group developed an Intraoperative Photoacoustic Screening (iPAS) soft tissue scanner featuring high bulk tissue sensitivity, a clinically compatible scan-time of 6 min, imaging depths greater than 2 cm and the capability to visualize whole breast tumors based on their lipid, rather than hemoglobin, profile. Here, we report on the first clinical experience with breast cancer patients by comparing tumor-measurement using iPAS, preoperative dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) and gold-standard pathology. Tumor size was measured volumetrically for iPAS and DCE-MRI, and separately using maximum diameters for pathology, DCE-MRI and iPAS. Comparisons were performed using Pearson's correlation coefficients, and the non-parametric Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Twelve consecutive patients were included in the study, contingent on pathologically documented invasive carcinoma. iPAS volumetric tumor size was positively correlated to DCE-MRI (Pearson's r = 0.78, p = 0.003) and not significantly different (Wilcoxon, p = 0.97). In comparison to pathology, tumor diameters given by iPAS were positively correlated (Pearson's r = 0.87, p = 0.0002) and significantly different (Wilcoxon, p = 0.0015). The results indicated that volumetric-measurement of invasive breast tumors with iPAS is similar to that of DCE-MRI. On the other hand, tumor diameter measurements were less reliable. Beyond enhancing surgical specimen examination, an extension of this technology to diagnostic imaging promises a new perspective on tumor assessment, potentially improving our current understanding and treatment of 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.