Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41345775›Full record

ArticleNPJ precision oncology2025

Quantitative ultrasound imaging for predicting response and guiding personalized neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: randomized phase 2 clinical trial results.

Daniel Moore-Palhares, David Alberico, Adrian Wai Chan, Daniel DiCenzo, Lakshmanan Sannachi, Archya Dasgupta, Joyce Yip, Maria Lourdes Anzola Pena, Sonal Gandhi, Rossanna Pezo and 14 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ precision oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04050228 (A Phase II Study of Quantitative Ultrasound to Guide Adaptive Chemotherapy Among Women With Locally Advanced Breast Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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.

NCT04050228 narecruitingnot on this map

A Phase II Study of Quantitative Ultrasound to Guide Adaptive Chemotherapy Among Women With Locally Advanced Breast Cancer (LABC)

TypeinterventionalSponsorSunnybrook Health Sciences CentreRan2018 to 2029Enrolled240ConditionsBreast CancerArmsQuantitative ultrasound to guide adaptive chemotherapy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

24 authors.

Daniel Moore-Palhares *Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
David Alberico *Physical Sciences, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Canada.
Adrian Wai Chan *Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Daniel DiCenzoPhysical Sciences, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Canada.
Lakshmanan SannachiPhysical Sciences, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Canada.
Archya DasguptaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Joyce YipPhysical Sciences, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Canada.
Maria Lourdes Anzola PenaPhysical Sciences, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Canada.
Sonal GandhiDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Rossanna PezoDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Andrea EisenDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Katarzyna J JerzakDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Carlos A Carmona GonzalezDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Ellen WarnerDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Frances C WrightDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Nicole Look-HongDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Amanda RobertsDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Ali Sadeghi-NainiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Belinda CurpenDepartment of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Mia SkarpathiotakisDepartment of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Carrie BetelDepartment of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Michael C KoliosDepartment of Physics, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, Canada.
Maureen TrudeauDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Gregory J CzarnotaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada. gregory.czarnota@sunnybrook.ca.

Funding

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

Abstract

Quantitative ultrasound (QUS) detects early tumor microstructural changes during neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), enabling personalized treatment adaptation. This study assessed the accuracy of machine learning models using serial QUS data to predict treatment response and evaluated their feasibility for guiding treatment personalization. This single-center, phase 2 randomized controlled trial (clinicaltrials.gov NCT04050228, Dec/2019) enrolled stage II-III breast cancer patients planned for standard NAC. QUS imaging was performed at baseline and week 4, with the latter used for response prediction. Patients were randomized 1:1 to standard or experimental arms, stratified by hormone receptor status. In the standard arm, oncologists were blinded to QUS results. In the experimental arm, predictions were disclosed to allow treatment modification at week 4. Final response was determined histopathologically (>30% tumor reduction or <5% cellularity). Between June 2018 and September 2023, 146 patients were enrolled, and 120 randomized (standard: 57, experimental: 63). Response rates were 93.0% (standard) and 96.8% (experimental). The model achieved 92% accuracy, 83% sensitivity, 93% specificity, and 99% positive predictive value. In the experimental arm, 8/63 patients were predicted non-responders, with 4 undergoing treatment modification. QUS-based machine learning enables accurate early response prediction and supports adaptive treatment strategies in future trials.

Identifiers

PMID41345775
PMCPMC12678599

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.