↓ Skip to main content

Potential of Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in the Characterization of Malignant, Benign, and Healthy Breast Tissues and Molecular Subtypes of Breast Cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
Potential of Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in the Characterization of Malignant, Benign, and Healthy Breast Tissues and Molecular Subtypes of Breast Cancer
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, May 2016
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2016.00126
Pubmed ID
Authors

Uma Sharma, Rani G. Sah, Khushbu Agarwal, Rajinder Parshad, Vurthaluru Seenu, Sandeep R. Mathur, Smriti Hari, Naranamangalam R. Jagannathan

Abstract

The role of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in the diagnosis of breast cancer and its association with molecular biomarkers was investigated in 259 patients with breast cancer, 67 with benign pathology, and 54 healthy volunteers using diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) at 1.5 T. In 59 breast cancer patients, dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCEMRI) was also acquired. Mean ADC of malignant lesions was significantly lower (1.02 ± 0.17 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) compared to benign (1.57 ± 0.26 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) and healthy (1.78 ± 0.13 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) breast tissues. A cutoff ADC value of 1.23 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s (sensitivity 92.5%; specificity 91.1%; area under the curve 0.96) to differentiate malignant from benign diseases was arrived by receiver operating curve analysis. In 10/59 breast cancer patients, indeterminate DCE curve was seen, while their ADC value was indicative of malignancy, implying the potential of the addition of DWI in increasing the specificity of DCEMRI data. Further, the association of ADC with tumor volume, stage, hormonal receptors [estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor (HER2)], and menopausal status was investigated. A significant difference was seen in tumor volume between breast cancer patients of stages IIA and IIIA, IIB and IIIA, and IIB and III (B + C), respectively (P < 0.05). Patients with early breast cancer (n = 52) had significantly lower ADC and tumor volume than those with locally advanced breast cancer (n = 207). No association was found in ADC and tumor volume with the menopausal status. Breast cancers with ER-, PR-, and triple-negative (TN) status showed a significantly larger tumor volume compared to ER+, PR+, and non-triple-negative (nTN) cancers, respectively. Also, TN tumors showed a significantly higher ADC compared to ER+, PR+, and nTN cancers. Patients with ER- and TN cancers were younger than those with ER+ and nTN cancers. The present study demonstrated that ADC may increase the diagnostic specificity of DCEMRI and be useful for treatment management in clinical setting. Additionally, it provides an insight into characterization of molecular types of breast cancer and may serve as an indicator of metabolic reprograming underlying tumor proliferation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 23%
Other 4 9%
Student > Master 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 10 23%
Unknown 8 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 49%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Engineering 2 5%
Computer Science 1 2%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 10 23%
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 01 June 2016.
All research outputs
#19,941,677
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#9,314
of 22,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#250,295
of 348,582 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#45
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,414 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 348,582 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 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.