Author
Nola M. Hylton
Other affiliations: University of California, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, University of California, Berkeley
Bio: Nola M. Hylton is an academic researcher from University of California, San Francisco. The author has contributed to research in topics: Breast cancer & Cancer. The author has an hindex of 53, co-authored 246 publications receiving 11642 citations. Previous affiliations of Nola M. Hylton include University of California & University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
TL;DR: I‐SPY 2 (investigation of serial studies to predict your therapeutic response with imaging and molecular analysis 2) is a process targeting the rapid, focused clinical development of paired oncologic therapies and biomarkers.
Abstract: I-SPY 2 (investigation of serial studies to predict your therapeutic response with imaging and molecular analysis 2) is a process targeting the rapid, focused clinical development of paired oncologic therapies and biomarkers. The framework is an adaptive phase II clinical trial design in the neoadjuvant setting for women with locally advanced breast cancer. I-SPY 2 is a collaborative effort among academic investigators, the National Cancer Institute, the US Food and Drug Administration, and the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries under the auspices of the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health Biomarkers Consortium.
656 citations
University of Pennsylvania1, Brown University2, Johns Hopkins University3, University of Virginia4, University of California, Los Angeles5, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences6, Technische Universität München7, University of California, San Francisco8, University of Bonn9, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill10, University of Toronto11, Harvard University12, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center13, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center14, University of Washington15
TL;DR: Multivariate models involving feature assessment have a diagnostic accuracy superior to that of qualitative characterization of the dynamic enhancement pattern and architectural and dynamic features are important in breast MR imaging interpretation.
Abstract: Purpose: To prospectively determine the prevalence and predictive value of three-dimensional (3D) and dynamic breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and contrast material kinetic features alone and as part of predictive diagnostic models. Materials and Methods: The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board or ethics committees of all participating institutions, and informed consent was obtained from all participants. Although study data collection was performed before HIPAA went into effect, standards that would be compliant with HIPAA were adhered to. Data from the International Breast MR Consortium trial 6883 were used in the analysis. Women underwent 3D (minimum spatial resolution, 0.7 × 1.4 × 3 mm; minimal temporal resolution, 4 minutes) and dynamic two-dimensional (temporal resolution, 15 seconds) MR imaging examinations. Readers rated enhancement shape, enhancement distribution, border architecture, enhancement intensity, presence of rim enhancement or internal septations, and th...
494 citations
Johns Hopkins University1, Brown University2, University of Virginia3, University of California, Los Angeles4, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences5, Technische Universität München6, University of California, San Francisco7, University of Bonn8, University of Washington9, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill10, University of Toronto11, Harvard University12, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center13, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center14, University of Pennsylvania15
TL;DR: Although the positive predictive value of MRI is greater than mammography, MRI does not obviate the need for subsequent tissue sampling in this setting and has high sensitivity but only moderate specificity independent of breast density, tumor type, and menopausal status.
Abstract: ContextBreast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been shown to have high
sensitivity for cancer detection and is increasingly used following mammography
to evaluate suspicious breast lesions.ObjectiveTo determine the accuracy of breast MRI in conjunction with mammography
for the detection of breast cancer in patients with suspicious mammographic
or clinical findings.Design, Setting, and PatientsProspective multicenter investigation of the International Breast MR
Consortium conducted at 14 university hospitals in North America and Europe
from June 2, 1998, through October 31, 2001, of 821 patients referred for
breast biopsy for American College of Radiology category 4 or 5 mammographic
assessment or suspicious clinical or ultrasound finding.InterventionsMRI examinations performed prior to breast biopsy; MRI results were
interpreted at each site, which were blinded to pathological results.Main Outcome MeasuresArea under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity,
and specificity of breast MRI.ResultsAmong the 821 patients, there were 404 malignant index lesions, of which
63 were ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and 341 were invasive carcinoma. Of
the 417 nonmalignant index lesions, 366 were benign, 47 showed atypical histology,
and 4 were lobular carcinoma in situ. The AUC pooled over all institutions
was 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86-0.91). MRI correctly detected
cancer in 356 of 404 cancer cases (DCIS or invasive cancer), resulting in
a sensitivity of 88.1% (95% CI, 84.6%-91.1%), and correctly identified as
negative for cancer 281 of 417 cases without cancer, resulting in a specificity
of 67.7% (95% CI, 62.7%-71.9%). MRI performance was not significantly affected
by mammographic breast density, tumor histology, or menopausal status. The
positive predictive values for 356 of 492 patients was 72.4% (95% CI, 68.2%-76.3%)
and of mammography for 367 of 695 patients was 52.8% (95% CI, 49.0%-56.6%)
(P<.005). Dynamic MRI did not improve the AUC
compared with 3-dimensional MRI alone, but the specificity of a washout pattern
for 123 of 136 patients without cancer was 90.4% (95% CI, 84%-95%).ConclusionsBreast MRI has high sensitivity but only moderate specificity independent
of breast density, tumor type, and menopausal status. Although the positive
predictive value of MRI is greater than mammography, MRI does not obviate
the need for subsequent tissue sampling in this setting.
491 citations
University of California, San Francisco1, University of Chicago2, University of Pennsylvania3, Buck Institute for Research on Aging4, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center5, University of Minnesota6, University of California, San Diego7, Mayo Clinic8, Loyola University Chicago9, Georgetown University10, University of Kansas11, University of Arizona12, Oregon Health & Science University13, University of Denver14, Inova Fairfax Hospital15, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center16, University of Southern California17, Emory University18
TL;DR: The process used in the I-SPY 2 trial showed that veliparib-carboplatin added to standard therapy resulted in higher rates of pathological complete response than standard therapy alone specifically in triple-negative breast cancer.
Abstract: BackgroundThe genetic and clinical heterogeneity of breast cancer makes the identification of effective therapies challenging. We designed I-SPY 2, a phase 2, multicenter, adaptively randomized trial to screen multiple experimental regimens in combination with standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. The goal is to match experimental regimens with responding cancer subtypes. We report results for veliparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, combined with carboplatin. MethodsIn this ongoing trial, women are eligible for participation if they have stage II or III breast cancer with a tumor 2.5 cm or larger in diameter; cancers are categorized into eight biomarker subtypes on the basis of status with regard to human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), hormone receptors, and a 70-gene assay. Patients undergo adaptive randomization within each biomarker subtype to receive regimens that have better performance than the standard therapy. Regimens are evaluated within 10 biomarker...
444 citations
TL;DR: MR imaging findings are a stronger predictor of pathologic response to NACT than clinical assessment, with the greatest advantage observed with the use of volumetric measurement of tumor response early in treatment.
Abstract: MR imaging findings are a stronger predictor of pathologic response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy than clinical assessment, with the greatest advantage observed with the use of volumetric measurement of tumor response early in treatment.
404 citations
Cited by
More filters
01 May 1981
TL;DR: This chapter discusses Detecting Influential Observations and Outliers, a method for assessing Collinearity, and its applications in medicine and science.
Abstract: 1. Introduction and Overview. 2. Detecting Influential Observations and Outliers. 3. Detecting and Assessing Collinearity. 4. Applications and Remedies. 5. Research Issues and Directions for Extensions. Bibliography. Author Index. Subject Index.
4,948 citations
TL;DR: It is concluded that multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys should be considered as a legitimate method for answering the question of why people do not respond to survey questions.
Abstract: 25. Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. By D. B. Rubin. ISBN 0 471 08705 X. Wiley, Chichester, 1987. 258 pp. £30.25.
3,216 citations
Journal Article•
3,097 citations
American Cancer Society1, University of Washington2, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences3, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust4, University of Washington Medical Center5, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center6, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill7, University of Pennsylvania8, Northwestern University9, University of Toronto10, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre11, University of Southern California12
TL;DR: There are several risk subgroups for which the available data are insufficient to recommend for or against screening, including women with a personal history of breast cancer, carcinoma in situ, atypical hyperplasia, and extremely dense breasts on mammography.
Abstract: New evidence on breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) screening has become available since the American Cancer Society (ACS) last issued guidelines for the early detection of breast cancer in 2003. A guideline panel has reviewed this evidence and developed new recommendations for women at different defined levels of risk. Screening MRI is recommended for women with an approximately 20-25% or greater lifetime risk of breast cancer, including women with a strong family history of breast or ovarian cancer and women who were treated for Hodgkin disease. There are several risk subgroups for which the available data are insufficient to recommend for or against screening, including women with a personal history of breast cancer, carcinoma in situ, atypical hyperplasia, and extremely dense breasts on mammography. Diagnostic uses of MRI were not considered to be within the scope of this review.
2,332 citations
TL;DR: This work presents the results of a meta-analysis conducted at the 2016 European Oncology and Radiotherapy Guidelines Working Group (ESMO) workshop on breast cancer diagnosis and prognosis of women with atypical central giant cell granuloma (CGM) who have previously had surgery.
2,274 citations