Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40805289›Full record

ArticleCancers2025

Validation of a Quantitative Ultrasound Texture Analysis Model for Early Prediction of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Response in Breast Cancer: A Prospective Serial Imaging Study.

Daniel Moore-Palhares, Lakshmanan Sannachi, Adrian Wai Chan, Archya Dasgupta, Daniel DiCenzo, Sonal Gandhi, Rossanna Pezo, Andrea Eisen, Ellen Warner, Frances Wright and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

18 authors.

Daniel Moore-PalharesDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3280-4498
Lakshmanan SannachiPhysical Sciences, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.
Adrian Wai ChanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.
Archya DasguptaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8341-2622
Daniel DiCenzoPhysical Sciences, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.
Sonal GandhiDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8993-1327
Rossanna PezoDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.
Andrea EisenDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8037-9556
Ellen WarnerDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-7956-6845
Frances WrightDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.
Nicole Look HongDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.
Ali Sadeghi-NainiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5055-339X
Mia SkarpathiotakisDepartment of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.
Belinda CurpenDepartment of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-3271-8087
Carrie BetelDepartment of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.
Michael C KoliosDepartment of Physics, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, ON M5B 2K3, Canada.
Maureen TrudeauDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0938-4499
Gregory J CzarnotaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.

Funding

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council 2019-06846Terry Fox Research Institute 1115
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

objectivesPatients with breast cancer who do not achieve a complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) may benefit from intensified adjuvant systemic therapy. However, such treatment escalation is typically delayed until after tumour resection, which occurs several months into the treatment course. Quantitative ultrasound (QUS) can detect early microstructural changes in tumours and may enable timely identification of non-responders during NAC, allowing for earlier treatment intensification. In our previous prospective observational study, 100 breast cancer patients underwent QUS imaging before and four times during NAC. Machine learning algorithms based on QUS texture features acquired in the first week of treatment were developed and achieved 78% accuracy in predicting treatment response. In the current study, we aimed to validate these algorithms in an independent prospective cohort to assess reproducibility and confirm their clinical utility.

methodsWe included breast cancer patients eligible for NAC per standard of care, with tumours larger than 1.5 cm. QUS imaging was acquired at baseline and during the first week of treatment. Tumour response was defined as a ≥30% reduction in target lesion size on the resection specimen compared to baseline imaging.

resultsA total of 51 patients treated between 2018 and 2021 were included (median age 49 years; median tumour size 3.6 cm). Most were estrogen receptor-positive (65%) or HER2-positive (33%), and the majority received dose-dense AC-T (n = 34, 67%) or FEC-D (n = 15, 29%) chemotherapy, with or without trastuzumab. The support vector machine algorithm achieved an area under the curve of 0.71, with 86% accuracy, 91% specificity, 50% sensitivity, 93% negative predictive value, and 43% positive predictive value for predicting treatment response. Misclassifications were primarily associated with poorly defined tumours and difficulties in accurately identifying the region of interest.

conclusionsOur findings validate QUS-based machine learning models for early prediction of chemotherapy response and support their potential as non-invasive tools for treatment personalization and clinical trial development focused on early treatment intensification.

Indexed as

breast cancermachine learningneoadjuvant chemotherapyprecision oncologyquantitative ultrasoundradiomics

Identifiers

PMID40805289
PMCPMC12345791

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.