ArticleScientific reports2024
Evaluation of cosmetic outcomes in breast reconstruction patients undergoing radiotherapy using an anomaly generative adversarial network model.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Considering the rising prevalence of breast reconstruction followed by radiotherapy (RT), evaluating the cosmetic impact of RT is crucial. Currently, there are limited tools for objectively assessing cosmetic outcomes in patients who have undergone reconstruction. Therefore, we validated the cosmetic outcome using a previously developed anomaly Generative Adversarial Network (GAN)-based model and evaluated its utility. Between January 2016 and December 2020, we collected computed tomography (CT) images from 82 breast cancer patients who underwent immediate reconstruction surgery followed by radiotherapy. Among these patients, 38 received immediate implant insertion, while 44 underwent autologous breast reconstruction. Anomaly scores (AS) were estimated using an anomaly GAN model at pre-RT, 1st follow-up, 1-year (Post-1Y) and 2-year (Post-2Y) after RT. Subsequently, the scores were analyzed in a time-series manner, considering reconstruction types (implant versus autologous), RT techniques, and the incidence of major complications. The median age of the patients was 46 years (range 29-62). The AS between Post-1Y and Post-2Y demonstrated a positive relationship (coefficient 0.515, P < 0.001). The AS was significantly associated with objective cosmetic indices, namely Breast Contour Difference (P = 0.009) and Breast Area Difference (P = 0.004), at both Post-1Y and Post-2Y. Subgroup analysis stratified by type of breast reconstruction revealed significantly higher AS values in patients who underwent prosthetic implant insertion compared to those with autologous reconstruction at all follow-up time points (1st follow-up, P = 0.001; Post-1Y, P < 0.001; and Post-2Y, P < 0.001). A threshold AS of ≥ 1.9 was associated with a 10% predicted risk of developing major complications. The feasibility of an AS generated by a GAN model for predicting both cosmetic outcomes and the likelihood of complications following RT has been successfully validated. Further investigation involving a larger patient cohort is warranted.
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.