MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract P2-06-16: Total Choline Measurement in Human Breast Using High-Speed MR Spectroscopic Imaging at 3T

2010· article· en· W2084839375 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chenyang Zhao, Patrick J. Bolan, Navneeth Lakkadi, Laurel O. Sillerud, M Royce, A.F. Wallace, SC Eberhardt, SJ Lee, Lesley Lomo, Stefan Posse

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVoxelNuclear medicineCholineBreast tissueBreast cancerBreast tumorEcho-planar imagingMedicineMagnetic resonance imagingRadiologyCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract PURPOSE: We developed a novel, quantitative and high-speed MR spectroscopic imaging (MRSI) method to map total Choline (tCho), a sensitive biomarker of breast tumor status, as an adjunct to enhance the limited specificity of routine dynamic-contrast enhanced (DCE) MRI. Quantitative tCho maps measured in 7 minutes were compared with tCho obtained with conventional Single Voxel Spectroscopy (SVS). METHOD AND MATERIALS: Measurements on a total of 18 healthy female subjects (mean age: 25.6±5) were performed using 3T MR scanners (Siemens Trio, Erlangen, Germany) located at the two partner sites equipped with 4-channel breast coil (Siemens, Erlangen, Germany) or 8-channel breast coil (Sentinelle Medical, Toronto, Canada). 2D MRSI data of an entire oblique slice were collected using Proton-Echo-Planar-Spectroscopic-Imaging (PEPSI) [1] with MEGA lipid suppression. Acquisition parameters were: TR/TE=1500ms/125ms, matrix size=32x32, voxel size=2x2x2mm3 (8cc), number of signal averages= 16 with weighted k-space sampling and total acquisition time=7 minutes. PRESS SVS data were acquired with 8 cc voxel size using identical TR/TE and acquisition time. The absolute metabolite concentration was calculated in reference to tissue water (millimoles of tCho per kilogram of solute) using LCModel (s-provencher.com) fitting to estimate the Choline peak baseline and subsequent spectral integration using a Cramer-Rao lower bound threshold of 25%. RESULTS: tCho was detected in 7 of the 15 subjects (47%) in both SVS and PEPSI data. In the PEPSI data sets, tCho was detected in multiple voxels (Fig. 1). Subjects in which tCho was detected exhibited narrower water line width and smaller lipid content than subjects in which tCho was not detectable (2-tailed t-test, P<0.01). The absolute tCho concentrations corrected for relaxation effects in these 7 subjects using SVS and PEPSI was 0.43±0.34 mmol/kg and 0.51±0.19 mmol/kg, respectively. In comparison with SVS data (21.8±8.6Hz), PEPSI spectra demonstrated larger water line width (33.9±12.6Hz) and displayed greater lipid contamination from adipose tissue areas and larger baseline distortion due to the spatial point spread function. CONCLUSION: Despite less favorable shimming and lipid suppression conditions compared to SVS, it is feasible to quantitatively map tCho in healthy breast tissue using high-speed MRSI, with concentration values that are consistent with those from SVS. Studies in breast cancer patients are in progress to assess the feasibility of breast cancer diagnosis and treatment monitoring with MRSI. Results will be reported at the Symposium. The long-term goals are to utilize high-speed MRSI as an early predictor of treatment failure in women undergoing systemic therapy (i.e. chemotherapy, endocrine therapy) for breast cancer and to develop an improved screening protocol for high risk patients. Fig. 1: PEPSI slice localization (left) and spectral array (right) with superimposed LCModel fit and integrated tCho peak Ref: (1) Posse et al. Magn. Reson. Med. 2007;58(2):236-244. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2010;70(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-06-16.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.115
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.355 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→