Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35223883›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2021

Evaluation of the Pink Luminous Breast LED-Based Technology Device as a Screening Tool for the Early Detection of Breast Abnormalities.

Fernando Ocasio-Villa, Luisa Morales-Torres, Norma Velez-Medina, Luis A Cubano, Juan C Orengo, Edu B Suarez Martinez

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Fernando Ocasio-VillaCEM: Corporación Especial Municipal para el Desarrollo de Investigaciones en Ciencias y Tecnologia de Ponce, Ponce, Puerto Rico.
Luisa Morales-TorresPublic Health Program, Ponce Health Sciences University, Ponce, Puerto Rico.
Norma Velez-MedinaCEM: Corporación Especial Municipal para el Desarrollo de Investigaciones en Ciencias y Tecnologia de Ponce, Ponce, Puerto Rico.
Luis A CubanoCEM: Corporación Especial Municipal para el Desarrollo de Investigaciones en Ciencias y Tecnologia de Ponce, Ponce, Puerto Rico.
Juan C OrengoPublic Health Program, Ponce Health Sciences University, Ponce, Puerto Rico.
Edu B Suarez MartinezCEM: Corporación Especial Municipal para el Desarrollo de Investigaciones en Ciencias y Tecnologia de Ponce, Ponce, Puerto Rico.
Ponce Health Sciences University · PR

Funding

UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO PONCE RESEARCH INITIATIVE FOR SCIENTIFIC ENHANCEMENT: UR25GM096955 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO PONCE · PI SUAREZ-MARTINEZ, EDU B · 2011 to 2020
$5.7M
NIGMS NIH HHS R25 GM096955
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast cancer is the leading cause of sex-specific female cancer deaths in the United States. Detection at earlier stages contributes to decreasing the mortality rate. The mammogram is the "Gold Standard" for breast cancer screening with an estimated sensitivity of 86.9% and a specificity of 88.9%. However, these values are negatively affected by the breast density considered a risk factor for developing breast cancer. Herein, we validate the novel LED-based medical device Pink Luminous Breast (PLB) by comparison with the mammogram using a double blinded approach. The PLB works by emitting a LED red light with a harmless spectrum of 640-800 nanometers. This allows the observation of abnormalities represented by dark or shadow areas. In this study, we evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of the PLB device as a screening tool for the early detection of breast abnormalities. Our results show that the PLB device has a high sensitivity (89.6%) and specificity (96.4%) for detecting breast abnormalities comparable to the adjusted mammogram values: 86.3 and 68.9%, respectively. The percentage of presence of breast density was 78.2% using PLB vs. 72.9% with the mammogram. Even with higher findings of breast density, the PLB is still capable of detecting 9.4% of calcifications compared to 6.2% in mammogram results and the reported findings for cysts, masses, or tumor-like abnormalities was higher using the PLB (6.5%) than the mammogram (5.6%). A 100% of the participants felt comfortable using the device without feeling pain or discomfort during the examination with 100% acceptability. The PLB positive validation shows its potential for routine breast screening at non-clinical settings. The PLB provides a rapid, non-invasive, portable, and easy-to-use tool for breast screening that can complement the home-based breast self-examination technique or the clinical breast examination. In addition, the PLB can be conveniently used for screening breasts with surgical implants. PLB provides an accessible and painless breast cancer screening tool. The PLB use is not intended to replace the mammogram for breast screening but rather to use it as an adjunct or complemental tool as part of more efficient earlier detection strategies contributing to decrease mortality rates.

Indexed as

breastearly-screeningimaging-based diagnosesLED-basedmammogram

Identifiers

PMID35223883
PMCPMC8868042
OpenAlexW4225756499

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.