ArticleScientific reports2020
Influence of residual fat signal on diffusion kurtosis MRI of suspicious mammography findings.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Image Quality Assessment of Diffusion-Weighted Imaging (DWI) and Its Impact on Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) as a Quantitative Imaging Biomarker for Predicting Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in High-Risk Early Breast Cancer.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2026Article
- Motion and Flow Robust Free-Breathing Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging of the Kidney.NMR in biomedicine · 2025Article
- Diffusion Breast MRI: Current Standard and Emerging Techniques.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
- Detection and Classification of Breast Lesions With Readout-Segmented Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in a Large Chinese Cohort.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent studies showed the potential of diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI) as a tool for improved classification of suspicious breast lesions. However, in diffusion-weighted imaging of the female breast, sufficient fat suppression is one of the main factors determining the success. In this study, the data of 198 patients examined in two study centres was analysed using standard diffusion and kurtosis evaluation methods and three DKI fitting approaches accounting phenomenologically for fat-related signal contamination of the lesions. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed the highest area under the curve (AUC) for the method including fat correction terms (AUC = 0.85, p < 0.015) in comparison to the values obtained with the standard diffusion (AUC = 0.77) and kurtosis approach (AUC = 0.79). Comparing the two study centres, the AUC value improved from 0.77 to 0.86 (p = 0.036) using a fat correction term for the first centre, while no significant difference with no adverse effects was observed for the second centre (AUC 0.89 vs. 0.90, p = 0.95). Contamination of the signal in breast lesions with unsuppressed fat causing a reduction of diagnostic performance of diffusion kurtosis imaging may potentially be counteracted by proposed adapted evaluation methods.
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.