ArticleComputational intelligence and neuroscience2022
Detection of Breast Cancer Lump and BRCA1/2 Genetic Mutation under Deep Learning.
Article in Computational intelligence and neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhanced drug delivery with nanocarriers: a comprehensive review of recent advances in breast cancer detection and treatment.Discover nano · 2024Review
- An Overview: Genetic Tumor Markers for Early Detection and Current Gene Therapy Strategies.Cancer informatics · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To diagnose and cure breast cancer early, thus reducing the mortality of patients with breast cancer, a method was provided to judge threshold of image segmentation by wavelet transform (WT). It was used to obtain information about the general area of breast lumps by making a rough segmentation of the suspected area of the lump on mammogram. The boundary signal of the lump was obtained by region growth calculation or contour model of local activity. Meanwhile, multiplex polymerase chain reaction (mPCR) and mPCR-next-generation sequencing (mPCR-NGS) were used to detect BRCA1/2 genome. Sanger test was used for newly high virulent mutations to verify the correctness of mutagenic sites. The results were compared with the information marked by experts in the database. According to Daubechies wavelet coefficients, the average measurement accuracy was 92.9% and the average false positive rate of each image was 86%. According to mPCR-NGS, there was no pathogenic mutation in the 7 patients with high-risk BRCA1/2 genetic mutations. Single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in nonsynonymous coding region was detected, which was consistent with the Sanger test results. This method effectively isolated the lump area of human mammogram, and mPCR-NGS had high specificity and sensitivity in detecting BRCA1/2 genetic mutation sites. Compared with traditional Sanger test and target sequence capture test, it also had such advantages as easy operation, short duration, and low cost of consumables, which was worthy of further promotion and adoption.
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.