Daniel B Kopans

Dr. Daniel B Kopans

Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

30Years (1997-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 September 2011 in Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DKDaniel B Kopans
Daniel B Kopans
RSRobert A. Smith
Robert A. Smith
SDStephen W. Duffy
Stephen W. Duffy


23 May 2008 in IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
TKTzu-Jen Kao
Tzu-Jen Kao
GBGregory Boverman
Gregory Boverman
BKBong Seok Kim
Bong Seok Kim
DIDavid Isaacson
David Isaacson
GSGary J. Saulnier
Gary J. Saulnier
DKDaniel B Kopans
Daniel B Kopans
It has been known for some time that many tumors have a significantly different conductivity and permittivity from surrounding normal tissue. This high ldquocontrastrdquo in tissue electrical properties, occurring between a few kilohertz and several megahertz, may permit differentiating malignant from benign tissues. Here we show the ability of electrical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) to roughly localize and clearly distinguish cancers from normal tissues and benign lesions. Localization of these lesions is confirmed by simultaneous, in register digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) mammography or 3-D mammograms.


14 April 2015 in Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
DKDaniel B Kopans
Daniel B Kopans

23 November 2021 in Journal of Medical Screening
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MYMartin Joel Yaffe
Martin Joel Yaffe
JSJean M. Seely
Jean M. Seely
PGPaula B Gordon
Paula B Gordon
SAShushiela Appavoo
Shushiela Appavoo
DKDaniel B Kopans
Daniel B Kopans
Two randomized trials were conducted in Canada in the 1980s to test the efficacy of breast cancer screening. Neither of the trials demonstrated benefit. Concerns were raised regarding serious errors in trial design and conduct. Here we describe the conditions that could allow subversion of randomization to occur and the inclusion of many symptomatic women in a screening trial. We examine anomalies in data where the balance would be expected between trial arms. “Open book” randomization and performance of clinical breast examination on all women before allocation to a trial arm allowed women with palpable findings to be mis-randomized into the mammography arm. Multiple indicators raising suspicion of subversion are present including a large excess in poor-prognosis cancers in the mammography trial arm at prevalence screen. Personnel described shifting of women from the control group into the mammography group. There is compelling evidence of subversion of randomization in Canadian National Breast Screening Study. Mis-randomization of even a few women with advanced breast cancer could markedly affect measured screening efficacy. The Canadian National Breast Screening Study trials should not influence breast screening policies.