↓ Skip to main content

Texture analysis on MR images helps predicting non-response to NAC in breast cancer

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
Texture analysis on MR images helps predicting non-response to NAC in breast cancer
Published in
BMC Cancer, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12885-015-1563-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

N. Michoux, S. Van den Broeck, L. Lacoste, L. Fellah, C. Galant, M. Berlière, I. Leconte

Abstract

To assess the performance of a predictive model of non-response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in patients with breast cancer based on texture, kinetic, and BI-RADS parameters measured from dynamic MRI. Sixty-nine patients with invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast who underwent pre-treatment MRI were studied. Morphological parameters and biological markers were measured. Pathological complete response was defined as the absence of invasive and in situ cancer in breast and nodes. Pathological non-responders, partial and complete responders were identified. Dynamic imaging was performed at 1.5 T with a 3D axial T1W GRE fat-suppressed sequence. Visual texture, kinetic and BI-RADS parameters were measured in each lesion. ROC analysis and leave-one-out cross-validation were used to assess the performance of individual parameters, then the performance of multi-parametric models in predicting non-response to NAC. A model based on four pre-NAC parameters (inverse difference moment, GLN, LRHGE, wash-in) and k-means clustering as statistical classifier identified non-responders with 84 % sensitivity. BI-RADS mass/non-mass enhancement, biological markers and histological grade did not contribute significantly to the prediction. Pre-NAC texture and kinetic parameters help predicting non-benefit to NAC. Further testing including larger groups of patients with different tumor subtypes is needed to improve the generalization properties and validate the performance of the predictive model.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 74 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 23%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 12%
Other 8 11%
Student > Master 8 11%
Researcher 5 7%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 17 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 30%
Engineering 14 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Physics and Astronomy 3 4%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 24 32%
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 06 August 2015.
All research outputs
#15,342,608
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#4,111
of 8,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,542
of 264,147 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#80
of 149 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,301 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 264,147 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 149 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.