Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 278

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

Partridge, Savannah C., Gibbs, Jessica E., Lu, Ying, Esserman, Laura J., Tripathy, Debasish, Wolverton, Dulcy S., Rugo, Hope S., Hwang, E. Shelley, Ewing, Cheryl A., Hylton, Nola M.·2005·American Journal of Roentgenology

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2214/ajr.184.6.01841774

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 278

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
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.