Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35406514›Full record

ArticleCancers2022

Breast Lesion Classification with Multiparametric Breast MRI Using Radiomics and Machine Learning: A Comparison with Radiologists' Performance.

Isaac Daimiel Naranjo, Peter Gibbs, Jeffrey S Reiner, Roberto Lo Gullo, Sunitha B Thakur, Maxine S Jochelson, Nikita Thakur, Pascal A T Baltzer, Thomas H Helbich, Katja Pinker

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Machine learning and new insights for breast cancer diagnosis.The Journal of international medical research · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Isaac Daimiel NaranjoMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, New York, NY 10065, USA.
Peter GibbsMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, New York, NY 10065, USA.
Jeffrey S ReinerMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, New York, NY 10065, USA.
Roberto Lo GulloMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, New York, NY 10065, USA.
Sunitha B ThakurMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, New York, NY 10065, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8090-3696
Maxine S JochelsonMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, New York, NY 10065, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4012-2470
Nikita ThakurTouro College of Osteopathic Medicine, Middletown, NY 10940, USA.
Pascal A T BaltzerDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Structural Preclinical Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Wien, Austria.
Thomas H HelbichDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Structural Preclinical Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Wien, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-3169-778X
Katja PinkerMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, New York, NY 10065, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2722-7331
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USMedical University of Vienna · ATTouro College · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Austrian National Bank Jubiläumsfonds # Nr: 18207Breast Cancer Research Foundation N/AFundación Alfonso Martín Escudero N/ANCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NIH HHS P30 CA008748Susan G. Komen N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This multicenter retrospective study compared the performance of radiomics analysis coupled with machine learning (ML) with that of radiologists for the classification of breast tumors. A total of 93 consecutive women (mean age: 49 ± 12 years) with 104 histopathologically verified enhancing lesions (mean size: 22.8 ± 15.1 mm), classified as suspicious on multiparametric breast MRIs were included. Two experienced breast radiologists assessed all of the lesions, assigning a Breast Imaging Reporting and Database System (BI-RADS) suspicion category, providing a diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) score based on lesion signal intensity, and determining the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC). Ten predictive models for breast lesion discrimination were generated using radiomic features extracted from the multiparametric MRI. The area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) and the accuracy were compared using McNemar's test. Multiparametric radiomics with DWI score and BI-RADS (accuracy = 88.5%; AUC = 0.93) and multiparametric radiomics with ADC values and BI-RADS (accuracy= 88.5%; AUC = 0.96) models showed significant improvements in diagnostic accuracy compared to the multiparametric radiomics (DWI + DCE data) model (

Indexed as

breast neoplasmsdiffusion magnetic resonance imagingmachine learningmagnetic resonance imagingmultiparametric magnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

PMID35406514
PMCPMC8997089
OpenAlexW4220675570

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.