Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42125694›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026

A quantitative method to compare regional tumor contrast between prone and supine breast MRI.

Brook K Byrd, Venkataramanan Krishnaswamy, Misty J Fox, Jiang Gui, Roberta DiFlorio-Alexander, Keith D Paulsen, Richard J Barth, Timothy B Rooney

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

NCT03573661 nacompletednot on this map

A Pilot Multi-Institutional Study to Evaluate the Accuracy of a Breast Cancer Locator in Patients With Palpable Cancers

TypeinterventionalSponsorDartmouth-Hitchcock Medical CenterRan2018 to 2021Enrolled18ConditionsPalpable Breast CancerArmsBreast Cancer Locator (BCL)
NCT03573804 nacompletednot on this map

The Prone to Supine Breast MRI Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorDartmouth-Hitchcock Medical CenterRan2018 to 2020Enrolled72ConditionsBreast CancerArmsProne to Supine MRI
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Brook K ByrdThayer School of Engineering, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, United States.
Venkataramanan KrishnaswamyCairnSurgical, Inc., Lebanon, NH, United States.
Misty J FoxDepartment of Radiology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH, United States.
Jiang GuiDepartment of Biomedical Data Science, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH, United States.
Roberta DiFlorio-AlexanderDepartment of Radiology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH, United States.
Keith D PaulsenThayer School of Engineering, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, United States.
Richard J BarthCairnSurgical, Inc., Lebanon, NH, United States.
Timothy B RooneyDepartment of Radiology and Medical Imaging, University of Virginia Health, Charlottesville, VA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: For surgical guidance applications, supine breast MRI tumor contrast should be non-inferior to prone MRI, currently considered the standard-of-care. However, comparing image contrast quantitatively between different MRI sequences and breast orientations presents a significant challenge. Herein, we present a method for quantitatively comparing regional tumor contrast in the prone and supine breast MRI orientations for the purpose of tumor localization, and we apply this framework to assess the performance of two investigational supine scans (i.e. independent and prone-to-supine, P2S) compared to diagnostic prone MRI. Methods: Patient tumors from two studies (NCT03573804, NCT03573661) were outlined slice-by-slice by a breast radiologist using Gd-enhanced, T1-weighted MRI. Image data were derived from subjects undergoing standard-of-care prone imaging (n = 78), independent supine imaging (n = 17), and P2S supine imaging (n = 61). Normalized tumor contrast was computed between the segmented tumor and neighboring normal tissue regions and compared for statistical differences amongst cohorts and non-inferiority to prone MRI. Results: The independent supine cohort possessed non-inferior tumor-to-fibroglandular contrast compared to prone (p = 0.002), while tumor-to-fibroglandular contrast from the P2S supine cohort was found inferior to the prone cohort. However, both investigational supine scans produced non-inferior tumor-to-adipose contrast when compared to prone MRI (p< 0.001 in both cases). Conclusions: Regional contrast between tumor and surrounding fibroglandular tissue suffered at later timepoints observed in the P2S supine study, resulting in inferior tumor contrast. However, when contrast-enhanced supine breast MRI is acquired independently, ratiometric comparisons indicate that tumor contrast is non-inferior to prone MRI.

Indexed as

BCS planningbreast neoplasmcontrast-enhanced MRImultimodal MRIsupine breast MRItumor contrast quantification

Identifiers

PMID42125694
PMCPMC13158090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.