Literature DB >> 19070222

Breast cancer imaging: a perspective for the next decade.

Andrew Karellas1, Srinivasan Vedantham.   

Abstract

Breast imaging is largely indicated for detection, diagnosis, and clinical management of breast cancer and for evaluation of the integrity of breast implants. In this work, a prospective view of techniques for breast cancer detection and diagnosis is provided based on an assessment of current trends. The potential role of emerging techniques that are under various stages of research and development is also addressed. It appears that the primary imaging tool for breast cancer screening in the next decade will be high-resolution, high-contrast, anatomical x-ray imaging with or without depth information. MRI and ultrasonography will have an increasingly important adjunctive role for imaging high-risk patients and women with dense breasts. Pilot studies with dedicated breast CT have demonstrated high-resolution three-dimensional imaging capabilities, but several technological barriers must be overcome before clinical adoption. Radionuclide based imaging techniques and x-ray imaging with intravenously injected contrast offer substantial potential as a diagnostic tools and for evaluation of suspicious lesions. Developing optical and electromagnetic imaging techniques hold significant potential for physiologic information and they are likely to be of most value when integrated with or adjunctively used with techniques that provide anatomic information. Experimental studies with breast specimens suggest that phase-sensitive x-ray imaging techniques can provide edge enhancement and contrast improvement but more research is needed to evaluate their potential role in clinical breast imaging. From the technological perspective, in addition to improvements within each modality, there is likely to be a trend towards multi-modality systems that combine anatomic with physiologic information. We are also likely to transition from a standardized screening, where all women undergo the same imaging exam (mammography), to selection of a screening modality or modalities based an individual-risk or other classification.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19070222      PMCID: PMC2673595          DOI: 10.1118/1.2986144

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  263 in total

1.  Combined diffuse optical spectroscopy and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for monitoring breast cancer neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a case study.

Authors:  Natasha Shah; Jessica Gibbs; Dulcy Wolverton; Albert Cerussi; Nola Hylton; Bruce J Tromberg
Journal:  J Biomed Opt       Date:  2005 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.170

2.  Combining near-infrared tomography and magnetic resonance imaging to study in vivo breast tissue: implementation of a Laplacian-type regularization to incorporate magnetic resonance structure.

Authors:  Ben Brooksby; Shudong Jiang; Hamid Dehghani; Brian W Pogue; Keith D Paulsen; John Weaver; Christine Kogel; Steven P Poplack
Journal:  J Biomed Opt       Date:  2005 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.170

3.  Performance of a high fill factor, indirect detection prototype flat-panel imager for mammography.

Authors:  Youcef El-Mohri; Larry E Antonuk; Qihua Zhao; Yi Wang; Yixin Li; Hong Du; Amit Sawant
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Study of the performance of a novel 1 mm resolution dual-panel PET camera design dedicated to breast cancer imaging using Monte Carlo simulation.

Authors:  Jin Zhang; Peter D Olcott; Garry Chinn; Angela M K Foudray; Craig S Levine
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  A large-scale study of the ultrawideband microwave dielectric properties of normal, benign and malignant breast tissues obtained from cancer surgeries.

Authors:  Mariya Lazebnik; Dijana Popovic; Leah McCartney; Cynthia B Watkins; Mary J Lindstrom; Josephine Harter; Sarah Sewall; Travis Ogilvie; Anthony Magliocco; Tara M Breslin; Walley Temple; Daphne Mew; John H Booske; Michal Okoniewski; Susan C Hagness
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2007-10-01       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Benefit of screening mammography in women aged 40-49: a new meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  R E Hendrick; R A Smith; J H Rutledge; C R Smart
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  1997

7.  The reduction of radiation and exposure time in mammography.

Authors:  J L Price; P D Bler
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  1970-04       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  Prototype coil for magnetic resonance imaging of the female breast. Work in progress.

Authors:  C B Stelling; P C Wang; A Lieber; S S Mattingly; W O Griffen; D E Powell
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1985-02       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Human observer detection experiments with mammograms and power-law noise.

Authors:  A E Burgess; F L Jacobson; P F Judy
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  X-ray imaging using avalanche multiplication in amorphous selenium: investigation of intrinsic avalanche noise.

Authors:  D C Hunt; Kenkichi Tanioka; J A Rowlands
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 4.071

View more
  26 in total

1.  First application of computed radiology to mammography with synchrotron radiation.

Authors:  E Quai; R Longo; F Zanconati; G Jaconelli; M Tonutti; A Abrami; F Arfelli; D Dreossi; G Tromba; M A Cova
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2012-06-28       Impact factor: 3.469

2.  A technique optimization protocol and the potential for dose reduction in digital mammography.

Authors:  Nicole T Ranger; Joseph Y Lo; Ehsan Samei
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Computer-aided interpretation approach for optical tomographic images.

Authors:  Christian D Klose; Alexander D Klose; Uwe J Netz; Alexander K Scheel; Jurgen Beuthan; Andreas H Hielscher
Journal:  J Biomed Opt       Date:  2010 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.170

4.  Physical effects of mechanical design parameters on photon sensitivity and spatial resolution performance of a breast-dedicated PET system.

Authors:  V C Spanoudaki; F W Y Lau; A Vandenbroucke; C S Levin
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: State of the Art.

Authors:  Srinivasan Vedantham; Andrew Karellas; Gopal R Vijayaraghavan; Daniel B Kopans
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Stereoscopic interpretation of low-dose breast tomosynthesis projection images.

Authors:  Gautam S Muralidhar; Mia K Markey; Alan C Bovik; Tamara Miner Haygood; Tanya W Stephens; William R Geiser; Naveen Garg; Beatriz E Adrada; Basak E Dogan; Selin Carkaci; Raunak Khisty; Gary J Whitman
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 4.056

7.  Optical mammography: Diffuse optical imaging of breast cancer.

Authors:  Kijoon Lee
Journal:  World J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-01-10

8.  Mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) identified proteomic biosignatures of breast cancer in proximal fluid.

Authors:  Stephen A Whelan; Jianbo He; Ming Lu; Puneet Souda; Romaine E Saxton; Kym F Faull; Julian P Whitelegge; Helena R Chang
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2012-09-20       Impact factor: 4.466

9.  Low dose high energy x-ray in-line phase sensitive imaging prototype: Investigation of optimal geometric conditions and design parameters.

Authors:  Muhammad U Ghani; Aimin Yan; Molly D Wong; Yuhua Li; Liqiang Ren; Xizeng Wu; Hong Liu
Journal:  J Xray Sci Technol       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 1.535

10.  Detection of lung, breast, colorectal, and prostate cancers from exhaled breath using a single array of nanosensors.

Authors:  G Peng; M Hakim; Y Y Broza; S Billan; R Abdah-Bortnyak; A Kuten; U Tisch; H Haick
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2010-07-20       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.