Mammographic Screening For Breast Cancer Research Articles

140 (PB-041) - Retrospective study comparing mammography alone and combination of ultrasonography and mammography in breast cancer screening

140 (PB-041) - Retrospective study comparing mammography alone and combination of ultrasonography and mammography in breast cancer screening

Added value of second biopsy target in screen-detected widespread suspicious breast calcifications.

There is controversy on the optimal work-up of screen-detected widespread breast calcifications: whether to biopsy a single target or multiple targets. This study evaluates agreement between multiple biopsy targets within the same screen-detected widespread (≥25mm) breast calcification to determine if the second biopsy adds value. Retrospective observational study of women screened in a statewide general population risk breast cancer mammographic screening program from 2009 to 2016. Screening episodes recalled for widespread calcifications where further views indicated biopsy, and two or more separate target areas were sampled within the same lesion were included. Percentage agreement and Cohen's Kappa were calculated. A total of 293317 women were screened during 761124 separate episodes with recalls for widespread calcifications in 2355 episodes. In 171 women, a second target was biopsied within the same lesion. In 149 (86%) cases, the second target biopsy result agreed with the first biopsy (κ=0.6768). Agreement increased with increasing mammography score (85%, 86% and 92% for score 3, 4 and 5 lesions). Same day multiple biopsied lesions were three times more likely to yield concordant results compared to post-hoc second target biopsy cases. While a single target biopsy is sufficient to discriminate a benign vs. malignant diagnosis in most cases, in 14% there is added value in performing a second target biopsy. Biopsies performed prospectively are more likely to yield concordant results compared to post-hoc second target biopsy cases, suggesting a single prospective biopsy may be sufficient when results are radiological-pathological concordant; discordance still requires repeat sampling.

Abstract P4-10-18: Medismart-Oncosmart: A low-cost private initiative to improve health care access in the middle-income country of Costa Rica. Overview of the breast cancer screening program

Abstract Background: Costa Rica is a middle-income country in Central America with a public, government run, universal health care system which provides coverage to over 95% of the population. Despite being recognized as one of the best health care systems in Latin America, recent national reports suggest that up to 15% of the population is currently on a waiting list for a medical visit or procedure. The impact of the national breast cancer screening program is unknown as the country's health care system and the national cancer registry fail to report statistical variables like screening waiting lists, breast screening coverage, stage at diagnosis, time from screening to biopsy, breast cancer subtypes, breast cancer mortality by stage, among others. Methods: In 2014, the private health plan Medismart partnered with the private Hospital Metropolitano network with the mission of developing a low-cost health care system that provides efficient access and affordable health care services to its affiliates. Medismart's health care plan costs $12 a month per member ($6 per additional affiliated family member) and uses a copay model for health care services utilized by its beneficiaries. In 2016, Oncosmart, a program of Medismart, was developed with the goal of implementing population based screening, diagnostic procedures, cancer treatment, and survivorship care to its members. The program has no restrictions on pre-existing conditions. Results: From January 2015 to April 2017, Medismart subscribed 50,122 members. During the first 12 months of launching the breast screening program, 3634 women (32% of target population of 11058 women over 40 years old) underwent breast cancer screening mammography, breast ultrasound or both at the Hospital Metropolitano network. The copayment price of mammography screening for Medismart members is $26 and the copayment price for breast ultrasound screening is $38. Of the women who underwent screening in this period, 153 required a breast biopsy and all biopsies performed at the Metropolitano hospital were completed within 30 days from the abnormal imaging study. Conclusion: Medismart-Oncosmart is a low cost and efficient private initiative that improves access to breast cancer screening in Costa Rica. Citation Format: Wiernik A, Lami Casaus L, Durman M, Herrera Guido R. Medismart-Oncosmart: A low-cost private initiative to improve health care access in the middle-income country of Costa Rica. Overview of the breast cancer screening program [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-10-18.

Applying Data-driven Imaging Biomarker in Mammography for Breast Cancer Screening: Preliminary Study

We assessed the feasibility of a data-driven imaging biomarker based on weakly supervised learning (DIB; an imaging biomarker derived from large-scale medical image data with deep learning technology) in mammography (DIB-MG). A total of 29,107 digital mammograms from five institutions (4,339 cancer cases and 24,768 normal cases) were included. After matching patients’ age, breast density, and equipment, 1,238 and 1,238 cases were chosen as validation and test sets, respectively, and the remainder were used for training. The core algorithm of DIB-MG is a deep convolutional neural network; a deep learning algorithm specialized for images. Each sample (case) is an exam composed of 4-view images (RCC, RMLO, LCC, and LMLO). For each case in a training set, the cancer probability inferred from DIB-MG is compared with the per-case ground-truth label. Then the model parameters in DIB-MG are updated based on the error between the prediction and the ground-truth. At the operating point (threshold) of 0.5, sensitivity was 75.6% and 76.1% when specificity was 90.2% and 88.5%, and AUC was 0.903 and 0.906 for the validation and test sets, respectively. This research showed the potential of DIB-MG as a screening tool for breast cancer.

Fake facts and alternative truths in medical research

BackgroundFake news and alternative facts have become commonplace in these so-called “post-factual times.” What about medical research - are scientific facts fake as well? Many recent disclosures have fueled the claim that scientific facts are suspect and that science is in crisis. Scientists appear to engage in facting interests instead of revealing interesting facts. This can be observed in terms of what has been called polarised research, where some researchers continuously publish positive results while others publish negative results on the same issue – even when based on the same data. In order to identify and address this challenge, the objective of this study is to investigate how polarised research produce “polarised facts.” Mammography screening for breast cancer is applied as an example.Main bodyThe main benefit with mammography screening is the reduced breast cancer mortality, while the main harm is overdiagnosis and subsequent overtreatment. Accordingly, the Overdiagnosis to Mortality Reduction Ratio (OMRR) is an estimate of the risk-benefit-ratio for mammography screening. As there are intense interests involved as well as strong opinions in debates on mammography screening, one could expect polarisation in published results on OMRR. A literature search identifies 8 studies publishing results for OMRR and reveals that OMRR varies 25-fold, from 0.4 to 10. Two experts in polarised research were asked to rank the attitudes of the corresponding authors to mammography screening of the identified publications. The results show a strong correlation between the OMRR and the authors’ attitudes to screening (R = 0.9).ConclusionMammography screening for breast cancer appears as an exemplary field of strongly polarised research. This is but one example of how scientists’ strong professional interests can polarise research. Instead of revealing interesting facts researchers may come to fact interests. In order to avoid this and sustain trust in science, researchers should disclose professional and not only financial interests when submitting and publishing research.

Insights Into Breast Cancer Screening: A Computer Simulation of Two Contemporary Screening Strategies.

The debate over the value of screening mammography is rekindled with each new published study or guideline. Central to the discussion are the uncertainties about screening benefits and harms and the criteria used to assess them. Today, the magnitude of benefits for a population is less certain, and the evolving concept of harm has come to encompass false-positives (FPs), unnecessary biopsies, overdiagnosis, and overtreatment. This study uses a Monte Carlo computer simulation to study the balance of benefits and harms of mammographic breast cancer screening for average-risk women. This investigation compares the American Cancer Society's 2015 mixed annual-biennial guideline with the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force's 2016 fixed biennial guideline. Screening strategies are compared using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves, an economic analysis describing uncertainty in evaluating costs and health outcomes. Strategy preference is examined under changing assumptions of willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life-year. Additionally, comparative effectiveness analysis is performed using FP screens and unnecessary biopsies per life-year gained. Alternative scenarios are compared assuming a reduced mortality benefit of screening. In general, results using both cost-effectiveness and clinical measures indicate that American Cancer Society's 2015 mixed annual-biennial guideline is preferred. Assuming decreases in the mortality benefit of mammography, no screening may be reasonable. The use of a mixed annual-biennial strategy for population screening takes advantage of the nonuniformity of occurrence of mammography benefits and harms over the duration of screening. This approach represents a step toward improving guidelines by exploiting age dependencies at which benefits and harms accrue.

Significance and Problem of the Combined Assessment of Mammography and Ultrasound for Breast Cancer Screening

Significance and Problem of the Combined Assessment of Mammography and Ultrasound for Breast Cancer Screening

A Questionnaire Survey on the Combined Assessment of Mammography and Ultrasound for Breast Cancer Screening

A Questionnaire Survey on the Combined Assessment of Mammography and Ultrasound for Breast Cancer Screening

Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening Prevalence and Associated Factors among Women in the South African General Population

Purpose:The aims of the study were to estimate the prevalence of breast and cervical cancer screening among women in the South African general population and assess associated factors.Methods:Data from a national population-based cross-sectional household survey in South Africa in 2012 for 10,831 women aged 30+ years were analysed using bivariate and multivariable logistic regression. The outcome variables were cervical cancer screening (Papanicolaou smear test) and breast cancer screening (mammography). Exposure variables were sociodemographic factors, lifestyle variables, and chronic conditions.Results:The prevalences of Papanicolaou (PAP) smear test and mammography participation were 52.0% and 13.4%, respectively. On multivariable logistic regression analysis, women with higher education, those who were non-black African, having medical aid and having chronic conditions were more likely to undergo a Pap smear test and mammography. Living in rural areas was related to a lower likelihood of receiving both types of screening. In addition, undertaking moderate or vigorous physical activity was associated with breast cancer screening.Conclusion:Screening for cervical cancer was relatively high but for breast cancer it was low, despite the latter being a major public health problem in South Africa. This may be attributed to the limited availability, affordability, and accessibility of breast cancer screening services among socio-economically disadvantaged individuals There are some socio-economic disparities in adopting both breast and cervical cancer screening guidelines that could be targeted by interventions.

Analyzing overdiagnosis risk in cancer screening: A case of screening mammography for breast cancer

ABSTRACTOverdiagnosis is defined as the diagnosis of an asymptotic cancer that would not have presented clinically in a patient's lifetime in the absence of screening. Quantifying overdiagnosis is difficult, since it is impossible to distinguish between a cancer that would cause symptoms in the patient lifetime and the ones that would not. In this study, a mathematical framework is developed to estimate the lifetime overdiagnosis and cancer mortality risks associated with cancer screening policies. We also develop an optimization model to extract screening policies with minimum overdiagnosis and lifetime breast cancer mortality risk. The proposed optimization model is highly nonlinear with complex structure. Therefore, we linearize the optimization model by introducing new decision variables and restructuring the equations to solve it optimally. We utilize existing data on breast cancer for average-risk women and evaluated mammography screening policies in terms of their associated lifetime overdiagnosis and breast cancer mortality risk. Optimal policies with minimum overdiagnosis and mortality risks are derived. The optimal policies outperform the existing in-practice policies by recommending more frequent screenings at younger ages, as the cancer is more aggressive and the remaining life expectancy is higher for younger patients.

What Do Patients Want to Know? Questions and Concerns Regarding Mammography Expressed Through Social Media

PurposeThe purpose of this project is to identify questions and concerns patients have regarding breast cancer screening mammography to establish priorities in patient education and health care communication. MethodsA content analysis of posted questions (June 2010 to February 2017) containing the keywords mammogram and mammography was conducted on the social media question and answer website Quora (Quora Inc, Mountainview, California). Question topic, responses, and number of views were recorded. Comparisons were made by respondent type (medical professional or nonmedical professional) for screening recommendations and accompanying evidence. Descriptive statistics were employed to summarize the results. ResultsOverall, 197,620 views of mammography-related questions were identified, focused on 51 questions and 172 responses (51 of 172 [29.7%] by medical professionals [n = 25]; 121 of 172 [70.3%] by nonmedical professionals [n = 121]). Mammographic efficacy (16 of 51 [31.4%]) and screening guidelines (10 of 51 [19.6%]) were the most frequently queried topics. Overall, the majority of respondents were supportive of screening mammography. Most medical professionals recommended screening mammography starting at age 40, even after revisions in guidelines. Among nonmedical professionals, 4 of 22 (18.2%) were against screening mammography with less consensus regarding appropriate age of initial screen. Health society websites and journal articles were the most commonly referenced sources among medical and nonmedical professionals, respectively. ConclusionA considerable interest in screening mammography guidelines and mammographic efficacy exists among users who seek health information on a social media question and answer website. Awareness of such platforms allows a unique opportunity for targeted health education and dissemination of accurate information, which may be able to reach a potentially untapped or hard-to-reach patient population.

Performance of 4years of population-based mammography screening for breast cancer combined with ultrasound in Tyrol / Austria.

Systems for the delivery of screening mammography vary among countries and these differences can influence screening effectiveness. We evaluated the performance of organized mammography screening for breast cancer combined with ultrasound in Tyrol / Austria, an approach that differs from many other population-based screening programs. Data on women aged 40-69 years screened in the period from June 2008 to May 2012 were collected within the framework of an organized screening program. A total of 272,555 invitations were sent to the target population living in Tyrol and 176,957 screening examinations were performed. We analyzed the main performance indicators as defined by European Union (EU) guidelines and some important estimates of harms. The estimated 2‑year participation rate was 56.9%. As ultrasound is implemented as second-line screening procedure, 76.2% of all women screened underwent supplementary ultrasound. In total 2322 women were recalled for further assessment (13.1 per 1000 screens) and 1351 biopsies were performed (7.6 per 1000 screens). The positive predictive value was 28.2% for assessment and 48.5% for biopsies. The cancer detection rate was 3.7 per 1000 screens and the proportion of all stage II+ screen-detected cancers was 35.5%. The interval cancer rate was 0.33 and 0.47 per 1000 screens in the first and second years, respectively. The estimated cumulative risk for afalse positive screening result and an unnecessary biopsy for women following the invitation approach was 21.1% and 9.4%, respectively. The performance of our population-based screening approach combining mammography and ultrasound is very favorable and potential harm is kept very low compared to other European mammography screening programs for breast cancer.

Interest of systematic tomosynthesis (3D mammography) with synthetic 2D mammography in breast cancer screening.

Full field digital mammography (FFDM) is the current pillar of breast cancer screening program. However, the emerging technique digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has demonstrated a significant increase in the sensibility of cancer detection in several large cohort trials. DBT is particularly helpful for young patients, dense breasts and soft masses due to its ability to reduce overlapping of tissue. In such a population of women, radiologists are more confident and the recall rates are reduced together with a higher positive predictive value. To reduce the breast absorbed doses of screened women and facilitate the workflow, a synthetized two-dimensional (2D) digital mammography (sDM) is obtained from DBT to replace the FFDM. No significant differences regarding detection of anomalies have been reported with respect to FFDM. These results validate a modern strategy for breast cancer screening supported by two views of DBT with sDM. In terms of mean absorbed doses, this strategy is around 1.5 mGy/view and almost equivalent to FFDM. In Europe, major limitations to such evolution are public health policies especially agreements and reimbursement for the technique being used in organized screening.

Overdiagnosis in mammography screening for breast cancer

Screening has been always considered as a double-edged sword. Cancer screening could save lives in some cases, however, in other cases, it might also turn people into overdiagnosis. Overdiagnosis is the diagnosis of cancer that will never cause symptoms or death during a patient's lifetime. Therefore, overdiagnosis might lead to unnecessary treatments and lifetime surveillance, and then increase economic burden and psychological burden. In this review, we focus on how to correctly evaluate the overdiagnosis rate, and how to avoid or reduce the harms caused by overdiagnosis in the future according to the reasons associated with overdiagnosis. After systematically reviewing the previous studies, we will try to identify the potential reasons associated with overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening with mammography, address how to correctly evaluate the overdiagnosis rate, and finally provide some suggestions to reduce the overdiagnosis.

Harms of Restrictive Risk-Based Mammographic Breast Cancer Screening.

The objective of this study was to determine if restrictive risk-based mammographic screening could miss breast cancers that population-based screening could detect. Through a retrospective search of records at a single institution, we identified 552 screen-detected breast cancers in 533 patients. All in situ and invasive breast cancers detected at screening between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2014, were included. Medical records were reviewed for history, pathology, cancer size, nodal status, breast density, and mammographic findings. Mammograms were interpreted by one of 14 breast imaging radiologists with 3-30 years of experience, all of whom were certified according to the Mammography Quality Standards Act. Patient ages ranged from 36 to 88 years (mean, 61 years). The breast cancer risks evaluated were family history of breast cancer and dense breast tissue. Positive family history was defined as a first-degree relative with breast cancer. Dense breast parenchyma was either heterogeneously or extremely dense. Group 1 consisted of the 76.7% (409/533) of patients who had no personal history of breast cancer. Of these patients, 75.6% (309/409) had no family history of breast cancer, and 56% (229/409) had nondense breasts. Group 2 consisted of the 16.7% (89/533) of patients who were 40-49 years old. Of these patients, 79.8% (71/89) had no family history of breast cancer, and 30.3% (27/89) had nondense breasts. Ductal carcinoma in situ made up 34.6% (191/552) of the cancers; 65.4% (361/552) were invasive. The median size of the invasive cancers was 11 mm. Of the screen-detected breast cancers, 63.8% (352/552) were minimal cancers. Many screen-detected breast cancers occurred in women without dense tissue or a family history of breast cancer. Exclusive use of restrictive risk-based screening could result in delayed cancer detection for many women.

Pathobiology of HER 2 positive small invasive (T1a,b) breast cancer: “A wolf in sheep’s clothing”

Small invasive breast cancers (cancers with maximum diameter <1cm, T1a,b) become more prevalent form of breast cancer as a result of the introduction of breast cancer mammographic screening programs. Although associated with an excellent prognosis, T1a,b breast cancers are heterogeneous group of tumors with prognostically unfavorable subset of cases, primarily those with axillary lymph node metastases. To determine if the HER2 overexpression is associated with the prognostically unfavorable traditional clinicopathological features in this group of breast cancers, clinicopathological features (age, tumor size, histological type, histological grade, nodal status, hormone receptor status, proliferation index, lymphovascular invasion, ploidy) of 38 HER2 positive T1a,b cancers were compared with those of the control group consisting of 315 HER2 negative T1a,b cancers. The comparison of clinicopathological features was made using χ2 and t-test. HER2 positive T1a,b breast cancers were significantly associated with higher tumor grades (p<0.001), negative hormone receptors (p=0.008), presence of lymphovascular invasion (p=0.025), high proliferation index (p<0.001), and abnormal DNA content (p=0.04). We also noticed the higher frequency of lymph node positive cases in the HER2 positive group of cancers (p=0.05). There were no differences in age, tumor size and histological type between investigated groups. Our group of HER2 positive T1a,b breast cancers was associated with many unfavorable traditional prognostic factors, demonstrating that this subtype of early breast cancer has an aggressive biological phenotype which may have potential benefit from adjuvant chemo and immunotherapy.

Artificial intelligence for breast cancer screening: Opportunity or hype?

Interpretation of mammography for breast cancer (BC) screening can confer a mortality benefit through early BC detection, can miss a cancer that is present or fast growing, or can result in false-positives. Efforts to improve screening outcomes have mostly focused on intensifying imaging practices (double instead of single-reading, more frequent screens, or supplemental imaging) that may add substantial resource expenditures and harms associated with population screening. Less attention has been given to making mammography screening practice ‘smarter’ or more efficient. Artificial intelligence (AI) is capable of advanced learning using large complex datasets and has the potential to perform tasks such as image interpretation. With both highly-specific capabilities, and also possible un-intended (and poorly understood) consequences, this viewpoint considers the promise and current reality of AI in BC detection.

A cross-sectional population-based study of breast cancer screening among women with HIV in Ontario, Canada.

As women with HIV live longer, the need for age-appropriate breast cancer screening will increase. We compared rates of screening mammography among women with and without HIV. We used administrative health databases to identify all women in Ontario, Canada, who were eligible for screening mammography (aged 50 to 74 yr and no history of breast cancer) as of Apr. 1, 2011. We used multivariable log-binomial regression to compare the 2-year period prevalence of screening mammography in 2011 to 2013 among women with and without HIV and to examine the correlates of screening among women with HIV. We identified 1 447 015 screen-eligible women, among whom 623 (0.04%) were women with HIV. Women with HIV were less likely to undergo screening than women without HIV (50.1% v. 63.4%, p < 0.001). Following multivariable adjustment, HIV-positive status was associated with significantly lower odds of undergoing mammography (adjusted prevalence ratio [PR] 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-0.89). Compared with women with HIV receiving regular care from both a family physician and an HIV specialist, women with HIV receiving neither kind of care (adjusted PR 0.64, 95% CI 0.50-0.83) or predominantly specialist care (adjusted PR 0.77; 95% CI 0.60 to 0.97) were less likely to undergo screening mammography. Women with HIV are less likely to undergo breast cancer screening mammography than women without HIV. Addressing this disparity requires optimizing care delivery to ensure adequate provision of comprehensive primary care to people with HIV.

Improved Performance of Adjunctive Ultrasonography After Mammography Screening for Breast Cancer Among Chinese Females

IntroductionUntil now, no studies have investigated whether women other than those with dense breasts are suitable for adjunctive ultrasonography after negative mammography, and investigated whether all women with negative mammography are suitable for adjunctive ultrasonography. MethodsBased on the Multi-modality Independent Screening Trial in China, a total of 31,918 women aged 45 to 65 years underwent both ultrasonography and mammography. Physicians performed ultrasonography and mammography separately and were blinded to each other's findings until their interpretations had been recorded. For both ultrasonography and mammography, suspicious results and those highly suggestive of a malignancy were confirmed by pathologic examination, whereas other results were confirmed by 1-year follow-up after initial screening. ResultsBased on Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) assessments, 84 (84.8%) of 99 cancers were identified on mammography (detection rate, 2.6/1000), and 61 (61.6%) of 99 cancers were identified on ultrasonography (detection rate, 1.9/1000). Integrated mammography with ultrasonography identified 94 (95.0%) of 99 cancers, with an increment of 11.9% in cancer detection rate (from 2.6/1000 to 2.9/1000) (P < .05). Moreover, among women with BIRADS 3, adjunctive ultrasonography detected no cancers. All 10 additional cancers detected by adjunctive ultrasonography were from women with BIRADS 0 to 2, at a cost of 207 women with false positives. Additionally, dense breasts and benign breast disease were significantly associated with positive ultrasonography after BIRADS 0 to 2 (all P values < .05). ConclusionsAfter negative mammography, adjunctive ultrasonography should only be recommended for BIRADS 0 to 2 but not BIRADS 3, especially for women with dense breasts or benign breast disease.

The Addition of Automated Breast Ultrasound to Mammography in Breast Cancer Screening Decreases Stage at Diagnosis

This study aimed to determine the best screening strategy using automated whole-breast ultrasound and mammography in women with increased breast density or an elevated risk of breast cancer. After an institutional review board waiver was obtained, a retrospective review of 122 cancer cases diagnosed in 3435 women with increased breast density or an elevated risk of breast cancer, screened with mammography and supplemental automated whole-breast ultrasound, was performed. The imaging modality on which each cancer was seen was noted. Screening strategies were postulated. For each screening strategy, rates of advanced cancer diagnosis, with 95% confidence limits, are calculated using the Clopper-Pearson method. Differences in outcomes were calculated using Cochrane Q test and McNemar test for paired observations. Results were expressed for all stages of cancer and for invasive cancers only. When all cancer stages are considered, mammographic screening reduces advanced cancers by 31% over no screening. Ultrasound-only screening results in a 32% reduction. The combination of mammographic and ultrasound screening reduces advanced cancers by 40% (P < .05). Compared to mammographic screening, mammographic plus ultrasound screening reduces advanced-stage cancers by 5.7% (P = 0.03) for all stages and 10.8% (P = 0.02) for invasive cancers. For women with increased breast density or who are at high risk of developing breast cancer, a combination of screening mammography and whole-breast automated ultrasound is superior to mammographic screening. Screening ultrasound alone is also an effective screening strategy.