MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2924308358 · doi:10.1097/rli.0000000000000553

Breast Cancer Assessment With Pulse-Echo Speed of Sound Ultrasound From Intrinsic Tissue Reflections

2019· article· en· W2924308358 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lisa Ruby, Sergio J. Sanabria, Katharina Martini, Konstantin J. Dedes, Denise Vorburger, Ece Oezkan, Thomas Frauenfelder, Orçun Göksel, Marga B. Rominger

Bibliographic record

VenueInvestigative Radiology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitätsspital Zürich
KeywordsMedicineUltrasoundBreast cancerFibroadenomaReceiver operating characteristicBreast tissueProspective cohort studyBreast imagingMammographyCancerRadiologyNuclear medicinePathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to differentiate malignant and benign solid breast lesions with a novel ultrasound (US) technique, which measures speed of sound (SoS) using standard US transducers and intrinsic tissue reflections and scattering (speckles) as internal reference. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective, institutional review board-approved, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant prospective comparison study was performed with prior written informed consent from 20 women. Ten women with histological proven breast cancer and 10 with fibroadenoma were measured. A conventional US system with a linear probe was used for SoS-US (SonixTouch; Ultrasonix, Richmond, British Columbia, Canada). Tissue speckle reflections served as a timing reference for the US signals transmitted through the breasts. Relative phase inconsistencies were detected using plane wave measurements from different angular directions, and SoS images with 0.5-mm resolution were generated using a spatial domain reconstruction algorithm. The SoS of tumors were compared with the breast density of a larger cohort of 106 healthy women. RESULTS: Breast lesions show focal increments ΔSoS (meters per second) with respect to the tissue background. Peak ΔSoS values were evaluated. Breast carcinoma showed significantly higher ΔSoS than fibroadenomas ([INCREMENT]SoS > 41.64 m/s: sensitivity, 90%; specificity, 80%; area under curve, 0.910) and healthy breast tissue of different densities (area under curve, 0.938; sensitivity, 90%; specificity, 96.5%). The lesion localization in SoS-US images was consistent with B-mode imaging and repeated SoS-US measurements were reproducible. CONCLUSIONS: Using SoS-US, based on conventional US and tissue speckles as timing reference, breast carcinoma showed significantly higher SoS values than fibroadenoma and healthy breast tissue of different densities. The SoS presents a promising technique for differentiating solid breast lesions.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations43
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInvestigative RadiologySame topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207