Pilot Study of Quantitative Analysis of Background Enhancement on Breast MR Images: Association with Menstrual Cycle and Mammographic Breast Density
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To perform semiautomated quantitative analysis of the background enhancement (BE) in a cohort of patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer and to correlate it with mammographic breast density and menstrual cycle. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Informed consent was waived after the research ethics board approved this study. Results of 177 consecutive preoperative breast magnetic resonance (MR) examinations performed from February to December 2009 were reviewed; 147 female patients (median age, 48 years; range, 26-86 years) were included. Ordinal values of BE and breast density were described by two independent readers by using the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System lexicon. The BE coefficient (BEC) was calculated thus: (SI2 · 100/SI1) - 100, where SI is signal intensity, SI2 is the SI enhancement measured in the largest anteroposterior dimension in the axial plane 1 minute after the contrast agent injection, and SI1is the SI before contrast agent injection. BEC was used for the quantitative analysis of BE. Menstrual cycle status was based on the last menstrual period. The Wilcoxon rank-sum or Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare quantitative assessment groups. Cohen weighted κ was used to evaluate agreement. RESULTS: Of 147 patients, 68 (46%) were premenopausal and 79 (54%) were postmenopausal. The quantitative BEC was associated with the menstrual status (BEC in premenopausal women, 31.48 ± 20.68 [standard deviation]; BEC in postmenopausal women, 25.65 ± 16.74; P = .02). The percentage of overall BE was higher when the MR imaging was performed in women in the inadequate phase of the cycle (<35 days, not 7-14 days; mean BEC, 35.7) compared with women in the postmenopausal group (P = .001). Premenopausal women had significantly higher BEC when compared with postmenopausal women (P = .03). There was no significant difference in the percentage of BE between breast density groups. CONCLUSION: Premenopausal women with breast cancer, and specifically women in the inadequate phase of the cycle, presented with higher quantitative BE than postmenopausal women. No association was found between BE and breast density.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".