Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36980539›Full record

ArticleCancers2023

Toward Intraoperative Margin Assessment Using a Deep Learning-Based Approach for Automatic Tumor Segmentation in Breast Lumpectomy Ultrasound Images.

Dinusha Veluponnar, Lisanne L de Boer, Freija Geldof, Lynn-Jade S Jong, Marcos Da Silva Guimaraes, Marie-Jeanne T F D Vrancken Peeters, Frederieke van Duijnhoven, Theo Ruers, Behdad Dashtbozorg

Open access · goldFull text read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Dinusha VeluponnarDepartment of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Lisanne L de BoerDepartment of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Freija GeldofDepartment of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3977-6864
Lynn-Jade S JongDepartment of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8562-7598
Marcos Da Silva GuimaraesDepartment of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9510-1028
Marie-Jeanne T F D Vrancken PeetersDepartment of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4472-4257
Frederieke van DuijnhovenDepartment of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3694-4049
Theo RuersDepartment of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9968-3723
Behdad DashtbozorgDepartment of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4443-1614
The Netherlands Cancer Institute · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is an unmet clinical need for an accurate, rapid and reliable tool for margin assessment during breast-conserving surgeries. Ultrasound offers the potential for a rapid, reproducible, and non-invasive method to assess margins. However, it is challenged by certain drawbacks, including a low signal-to-noise ratio, artifacts, and the need for experience with the acquirement and interpretation of images. A possible solution might be computer-aided ultrasound evaluation. In this study, we have developed new ensemble approaches for automated breast tumor segmentation. The ensemble approaches to predict positive and close margins (distance from tumor to margin ≤ 2.0 mm) in the ultrasound images were based on 8 pre-trained deep neural networks. The best optimum ensemble approach for segmentation attained a median Dice score of 0.88 on our data set. Furthermore, utilizing the segmentation results we were able to achieve a sensitivity of 96% and a specificity of 76% for predicting a close margin when compared to histology results. The promising results demonstrate the capability of AI-based ultrasound imaging as an intraoperative surgical margin assessment tool during breast-conserving surgery.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencebreast cancerbreast surgerydeep learningsurgical margintumor segmentationultrasound

Identifiers

PMID36980539
PMCPMC10046373
OpenAlexW4323566118

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read54
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.