Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34563442›Full record

ArticleAcademic radiology2022

Power Spectrum Analysis of Breast Parenchyma with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Images in a Longitudinal Screening Cohort from Two Vendors.

Kai Yang, Craig K Abbey, Shinn-Huey Shirley Chou, Brian N Dontchos, Xinhua Li, Constance D Lehman, Bob Liu

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Academic radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kai YangDivision of Diagnostic Imaging Physics, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. Electronic address: kyang11@mgh.harvard.edu.
Craig K AbbeyDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, California.
Shinn-Huey Shirley ChouDepartment of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Brian N DontchosDepartment of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Xinhua LiDivision of Diagnostic Imaging Physics, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Constance D LehmanDepartment of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Bob LiuDivision of Diagnostic Imaging Physics, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Massachusetts General Hospital · USUniversity of California, Santa Barbara · US

Funding

Modeling observer performance in low-dose CT assessmentsR01EB025829 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA BARBARA · PI ABBEY, CRAIG KENDALL · 2018 to 2021
$1.7M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB025829
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RATIONALE AND

objectivesTo quantitatively compare breast parenchymal texture between two Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) vendors using images from the same patients. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis retrospective study included consecutive patients who had normal screening DBT exams performed in January 2018 from GE and normal screening DBT exams in adjacent years from Hologic. Power spectrum analysis was performed within the breast tissue region. The slope of a linear function between log-frequency and log-power, β, was derived as a quantitative measure of breast texture and compared within and across vendors along with secondary parameters (laterality, view, year, image format, and breast density) with correlation tests and t-tests.

resultsA total of 24,339 DBT slices or synthetic 2D images from 85 exams in 25 women were analyzed. Strong power-law behavior was verified from all images. Values of β d did not differ significantly for laterality, view, or year. Significant differences of β were observed across vendors for DBT images (Hologic: 3.4±0.2 vs GE: 3.1±0.2, 95% CI on difference: 0.27 to 0.30) and synthetic 2D images (Hologic: 2.7±0.3 vs GE: 3.0±0.2, 95% CI on difference: -0.36 to -0.27), and density groups with each vendor: scattered (GE: 3.0±0.3, Hologic: 3.3±0.3) vs. heterogeneous (GE: 3.2±0.2, Hologic: 3.4±0.1), 95% CI (-0.27, -0.08) and (-0.21, -0.05), respectively.

conclusionThere are quantitative differences in the presentation of breast imaging texture between DBT vendors and across breast density categories. Our findings have relevance and importance for development and optimization of AI algorithms related to breast density assessment and cancer detection.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsMammographyBreastFemaleHumansMass ScreeningRetrospective StudiesSpectrum AnalysisAnatomical NoiseBreast Cancer ScreeningBreast DensityBreast ParenchymaDigital Breast Tomosynthesis

Identifiers

PMID34563442
PMCPMC9924291
OpenAlexW3203895924

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.