↓ Skip to main content

Addition of T2-guided optical tomography improves noncontrast breast magnetic resonance imaging diagnosis

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Addition of T2-guided optical tomography improves noncontrast breast magnetic resonance imaging diagnosis
Published in
Breast Cancer Research, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13058-017-0902-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jinchao Feng, Junqing Xu, Shudong Jiang, Hong Yin, Yan Zhao, Jiang Gui, Ke Wang, Xiuhua Lv, Fang Ren, Brian W. Pogue, Keith D. Paulsen

Abstract

While dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE MRI) is recognized as the most sensitive examination for breast cancer detection, it has a substantial false positive rate and gadolinium (Gd) contrast agents are not universally well tolerated. As a result, alternatives to diagnosing breast cancer based on endogenous contrast are of growing interest. In this study, endogenous near-infrared spectral tomography (NIRST) guided by T2 MRI was evaluated to explore whether the combined imaging modality, which does not require contrast injection or involve ionizing radiation, can achieve acceptable diagnostic performance. Twenty-four subjects-16 with pathologically confirmed malignancy and 8 with benign abnormalities-were simultaneously imaged with MRI and NIRST prior to definitive pathological diagnosis. MRIs were evaluated independently by three breast radiologists blinded to the pathological results. Optical image reconstructions were constrained by grayscale values in the T2 MRI. MRI and NIRST images were used, alone and in combination, to estimate the diagnostic performance of the data. Outcomes were compared to DCE results. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the curve (AUC) of noncontrast MRI when combined with T2-guided NIRST were 94%, 100%, 96%, and 0.95, respectively, whereas these values were 94%, 63%, 88%, and 0.81 for DCE MRI alone, and 88%, 88%, 88%, and 0.94 when DCE-guided NIRST was added. In this study, the overall accuracy of imaging diagnosis improved to 96% when T2-guided NIRST was added to noncontrast MRI alone, relative to 88% for DCE MRI, suggesting that similar or better diagnostic accuracy can be achieved without requiring a contrast agent.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 28%
Student > Bachelor 3 17%
Researcher 3 17%
Lecturer 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 2 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 6 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 28%
Physics and Astronomy 1 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 3 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 October 2017.
All research outputs
#20,663,600
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research
#1,708
of 2,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#262,268
of 338,208 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research
#20
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,054 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 338,208 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.