MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204485462 · doi:10.1259/bjr.20210907

The Wavelia Microwave Breast Imaging system–tumour discriminating features and their clinical usefulness

2021· article· en· W3204485462 on OpenAlexaff
Brian Moloney, Peter McAnena, Sami Abd Elwahab, Angie Fasoula, Luc Duchesne, Julio Daniel Gil Cano, Catherine Glynn, AnnaMarie O’Connell, Rachel Ennis, Aoïfe Lowery, Michael J. Kerin

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Radiology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering Analysis
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalUniversity Health NetworkMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerMedicineMalignancyBreast imagingRadiologyHistopathologyBreast MRIMammographyBreast diseaseCancerPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The Wavelia Microwave Breast Imaging (MBI) system, based on non-ionising imaging technology, has demonstrated exciting potential in the detection and localisation of breast pathology in symptomatic patients. In this study, the ability of the system to accurately estimate the size and likelihood of malignancy of breast lesions is detailed, and its clinical usefulness determined. METHODS: Institutional review board and Health Products Regulatory Authority (HPRA) approval were obtained. Patients were recruited from the symptomatic unit to three groups; breast cancer (Group-1), unaspirated cysts (Group-2) and biopsied benign lesions (Group-3). MBI, radiological and histopathological findings were reviewed. MBI size estimations were compared with the sizes determined by conventional imaging and histopathology. A Quadratic Discriminant Analysis (QDA) classifier was trained in a 3D feature space to discriminate malignant from benign lesions. An independent review was performed by two independent breast radiologists. RESULTS: 24 patients (11 Group-1, 8 Group-2 and 5 Group-3) underwent MBI. The Wavelia system was more accurate than conventional imaging in size estimation of breast cancers. The QDA accurately separated benign from malignant breast lesions in 88.5% of cases. The addition of MBI and the Wavelia malignancy risk calculation was deemed useful by the two radiologists in 70.6% of cases. CONCLUSION: The results from this MBI investigation demonstrate the potential of this novel system in estimating size and malignancy risk of breast lesions. This system holds significant promise as a potential non-invasive, comfortable, and harmless adjunct for breast cancer diagnosis. Further larger studies are under preparation to validate the findings of this study. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This study details the potential of the Wavelia MBI system in delineating size and malignancy risk of benign and malignant breast lesions in a symptomatic cohort. The usefulness of the Wavelia system is assessed in the clinical setting.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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)0.0020.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations18
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of RadiologySame topicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering AnalysisFrench-language works237,207