The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
MRI Measurements of Breast Tumor Volume Predict Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Recurrence-Free Survival
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the value of MRI measurements of breast tumor size for predicting recurrence-free survival (RFS) in patients undergoing neoadjuvant (preoperative) chemotherapy and to compare the predictive value of MRI with that of established prognostic indicators. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The study included 62 patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The longest diameter and volume of each tumor were measured on MRI before and after one and four cycles of treatment. Change in diameter on clinical examination, tumor size at pathology, and the number of positive nodes were determined. Each measure of tumor extent was assessed for the ability to predict RFS. RESULTS: Univariate Cox analysis showed initial MRI volume was the strongest predictor of RFS (p = 0.002). Final change in MRI volume (p = 0.015) was more predictive than change in diameter on MRI (p = 0.077) or clinical examination (p = 0.27). Initial diameter on MRI (p = 0.003) and clinical examination (p = 0.033), tumor size at pathology (p = 0.016), and number of positive nodes (p = 0.045) were also significantly predictive of RFS. Early change in MRI volume (p = 0.071) and diameter (p = 0.081) after one chemotherapy cycle showed trends of association with RFS. Multivariate analysis showed initial MRI volume (p = 0.005) and final change in MRI volume (p = 0.003) were significant independent predictors. CONCLUSION: MRI tumor volume was more predictive of RFS than tumor diameter, suggesting that volumetric changes measured using MRI may provide a more sensitive assessment of treatment efficacy.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
New Guidelines to Evaluate the Response to Treatment in Solid Tumors
Therasse, P., Arbuck, S. G., Eisenhauer, E. A., Wanders, J., Kaplan, R. S., Rubinstein, L., Verweij, J., Van Glabbeke, M., van Oosterom, A. T., Christian, M. C., et al. (2000) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/92.3.205 · Cited by 15,660
Cited by
Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: Recommendations from the EUSOMA working group
Sardanelli, F., Boetes, C., Borisch, B., Decker, T., Federico, M., Gilbert, F. J., Helbich, T., Heywang-Köbrunner, S. H., Kaiser, W. A., Kerin, M. J., et al. (2010) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2010.02.015 · Cited by 992
Solin, L. J., Orel, S. G., Hwang, W.-T., Harris, E. E., & Schnall, M. D. (2008) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2006.09.5448 · Cited by 346
Role of imaging in the era of precision medicine
Giardino, A., Gupta, S., Olson, E., Sepulveda, K., Lenchik, L., Ivanidze, J., Rakow-Penner, R., Patel, M. J., Subramaniam, R. M., & Ganeshan, D. (2017) · Academic Radiology · doi:10.1016/j.acra.2016.11.021 · Cited by 87
Metadata
- Authors
- Partridge, S. C., Gibbs, J. E., Lu, Y., Esserman, L. J., Tripathy, D., Wolverton, D. S., Rugo, H. S., Hwang, E. S., Ewing, C. A., & Hylton, N. M.
- Venue
- American Journal of Roentgenology
- Publisher
- American Roentgen Ray Society
- Published
- 2005-06
- Volume
- 184
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1774-1781
- ISSN
- 0002-9580 (ISSN-L)
- 0361-803X
- 1546-3141
- OpenAlex
- W2034505940
- Cited by
- 278
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 14.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: MRI Measurements of Breast Tumor Volume Predict Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Recurrence-Free Survival. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2214/ajr.184.6.01841774
- The paper
- Partridge, S. C., Gibbs, J. E., Lu, Y., Esserman, L. J., Tripathy, D., Wolverton, D. S., Rugo, H. S., Hwang, E. S., Ewing, C. A., & Hylton, N. M. (2005). MRI Measurements of Breast Tumor Volume Predict Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Recurrence-Free Survival. American Journal of Roentgenology. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.184.6.01841774
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.