ArticleJournal of biomedical optics2023
Stochastic three-dimensional numerical phantoms to enable computational studies in quantitative optoacoustic computed tomography of breast cancer.
Article in Journal of biomedical optics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- In-silico investigation into optimal photoacoustic probe design using a digital thyroid phantom.Journal of biomedical optics · 2027Article
- Stochastic numerical head phantoms to enable virtual imaging studies of transcranial photoacoustic computed tomography.Photoacoustics · 2026Article
- A virtual imaging framework for three-dimensional quantitative optoacoustic tomography using stochastic numerical breast phantoms.Photoacoustics · 2026Article
- Machine-learning-enhanced image reconstruction in optical tomography using the Monte Carlo method for light transport.Journal of biomedical optics · 2026Article
- Ultrasound-guided sound speed correction for photoacoustic computed tomography.Photoacoustics · 2026Article
- Application of a virtual imaging framework for investigating a deep learning-based reconstruction method for 3D quantitative photoacoustic computed tomography.Photoacoustics · 2026Article
- Learning a Filtered Backprojection Reconstruction Method for Photoacoustic Computed Tomography With Hemispherical Measurement Geometries.IEEE transactions on medical imaging · 2026Article
- Low frequency detection in clinical multispectral optoacoustic tomography.Photoacoustics · 2025Article
- Reconstructing multiple initial pressure and speed of sound distributions simultaneously in photoacoustic tomography.Photoacoustics · 2025Article
- DOT-AE-GAN: a hybrid autoencoder-GAN model for enhanced ultrasound-guided diffuse optical tomography reconstruction.Journal of biomedical optics · 2025Article
- Revisiting the joint estimation of initial pressure and speed-of-sound distributions in photoacoustic computed tomography with consideration of canonical object constraints.Photoacoustics · 2025Article
- Optimizing quantitative photoacoustic imaging systems: the Bayesian Cramér-Rao bound approach.Inverse problems · 2024Article
- Impact of skin tone on target size detectability in photoacoustic breast imaging.Biophotonics discovery · 2024Article
- Deep-learning-based image super-resolution of an end-expandable optical fiber probe for application in esophageal cancer diagnostics.Journal of biomedical optics · 2024Article
- Quantitative photoacoustic tomography: modeling and inverse problems.Journal of biomedical optics · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Significance: When developing a new quantitative optoacoustic computed tomography (OAT) system for diagnostic imaging of breast cancer, objective assessments of various system designs through human trials are infeasible due to cost and ethical concerns. In prototype stages, however, different system designs can be cost-efficiently assessed via virtual imaging trials (VITs) employing ensembles of digital breast phantoms, i.e., numerical breast phantoms (NBPs), that convey clinically relevant variability in anatomy and optoacoustic tissue properties. Aim: The aim is to develop a framework for generating ensembles of realistic three-dimensional (3D) anatomical, functional, optical, and acoustic NBPs and numerical lesion phantoms (NLPs) for use in VITs of OAT applications in the diagnostic imaging of breast cancer. Approach: The generation of the anatomical NBPs was accomplished by extending existing NBPs developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. As these were designed for use in mammography applications, substantial modifications were made to improve blood vasculature modeling for use in OAT. The NLPs were modeled to include viable tumor cells only or a combination of viable tumor cells, necrotic core, and peripheral angiogenesis region. Realistic optoacoustic tissue properties were stochastically assigned in the NBPs and NLPs. Results: To advance optoacoustic and optical imaging research, 84 datasets have been released; these consist of anatomical, functional, optical, and acoustic NBPs and the corresponding simulated multi-wavelength optical fluence, initial pressure, and OAT measurements. The generated NBPs were compared with clinical data with respect to the volume of breast blood vessels and spatially averaged effective optical attenuation. The usefulness of the proposed framework was demonstrated through a case study to investigate the impact of acoustic heterogeneity on OAT images of the breast. Conclusions: The proposed framework will enhance the authenticity of virtual OAT studies and can be widely employed for the investigation and development of advanced image reconstruction and machine learning-based methods, as well as the objective evaluation and optimization of the OAT system designs.
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.