scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers on "Mammography published in 2014"


Journal ArticleDOI
25 Jun 2014-JAMA
TL;DR: Addition of tomosynthesis to digital mammography was associated with a decrease in recall rate and an increase in cancer detection rate, and further studies are needed to assess the relationship to clinical outcomes.
Abstract: mammography + tomosynthesis; difference, 1.3 (95% CI, 0.4-2.1; P = .004); for cancer detection, 4.2 (95% CI, 3.8-4.7) with digital mammography vs 5.4 (95% CI, 4.9-6.0) with digital mammography + tomosynthesis; difference, 1.2 (95% CI, 0.8-1.6; P < .001); and for invasive cancer detection, 2.9 (95% CI, 2.5-3.2) with digital mammography vs 4.1 (95% CI, 3.7-4.5) with digital mammography + tomosynthesis; difference, 1.2 (95% CI, 0.8-1.6; P < .001). The in situ cancer detection rate was 1.4 (95% CI, 1.2-1.6) per 1000 screens with both methods. Adding tomosynthesis was associated with an increase in the positive predictive value for recall from 4.3% to 6.4% (difference, 2.1%; 95% CI, 1.7%-2.5%; P < .001) and for biopsy from 24.2% to 29.2% (difference, 5.0%; 95% CI, 3.0%-7.0%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Addition of tomosynthesis to digital mammography was associated with a decrease in recall rate and an increase in cancer detection rate. Further studies are needed to assess the relationship to clinical outcomes.

699 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
11 Feb 2014-BMJ
TL;DR: Annual mammography in women aged 40-59 does not reduce mortality from breast cancer beyond that of physical examination or usual care when adjuvant therapy for breast cancer is freely available.
Abstract: Objective To compare breast cancer incidence and mortality up to 25 years in women aged 40-59 who did or did not undergo mammography screening. Design Follow-up of randomised screening trial by centre coordinators, the study’s central office, and linkage to cancer registries and vital statistics databases. Setting 15 screening centres in six Canadian provinces,1980-85 (Nova Scotia, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Alberta, and British Columbia). Participants 89 835 women, aged 40-59, randomly assigned to mammography (five annual mammography screens) or control (no mammography). Interventions Women aged 40-49 in the mammography arm and all women aged 50-59 in both arms received annual physical breast examinations. Women aged 40-49 in the control arm received a single examination followed by usual care in the community. Main outcome measure Deaths from breast cancer. Results During the five year screening period, 666 invasive breast cancers were diagnosed in the mammography arm (n=44 925 participants) and 524 in the controls (n=44 910), and of these, 180 women in the mammography arm and 171 women in the control arm died of breast cancer during the 25 year follow-up period. The overall hazard ratio for death from breast cancer diagnosed during the screening period associated with mammography was 1.05 (95% confidence interval 0.85 to 1.30). The findings for women aged 40-49 and 50-59 were almost identical. During the entire study period, 3250 women in the mammography arm and 3133 in the control arm had a diagnosis of breast cancer, and 500 and 505, respectively, died of breast cancer. Thus the cumulative mortality from breast cancer was similar between women in the mammography arm and in the control arm (hazard ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.88 to 1.12). After 15 years of follow-up a residual excess of 106 cancers was observed in the mammography arm, attributable to over-diagnosis. Conclusion Annual mammography in women aged 40-59 does not reduce mortality from breast cancer beyond that of physical examination or usual care when adjuvant therapy for breast cancer is freely available. Overall, 22% (106/484) of screen detected invasive breast cancers were over-diagnosed, representing one over-diagnosed breast cancer for every 424 women who received mammography screening in the trial.

650 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper presents an overview of methods that have been proposed for the analysis of breast cancer histopathology images, and a discussion of the different image processing techniques and applications, ranging from analysis of tissue staining to computer-aided diagnosis, and prognosis of Breast cancer patients.
Abstract: This paper presents an overview of methods that have been proposed for the analysis of breast cancer histopathology images. This research area has become particularly relevant with the advent of whole slide imaging (WSI) scanners, which can perform cost-effective and high-throughput histopathology slide digitization, and which aim at replacing the optical microscope as the primary tool used by pathologist. Breast cancer is the most prevalent form of cancers among women, and image analysis methods that target this disease have a huge potential to reduce the workload in a typical pathology lab and to improve the quality of the interpretation. This paper is meant as an introduction for nonexperts. It starts with an overview of the tissue preparation, staining and slide digitization processes followed by a discussion of the different image processing techniques and applications, ranging from analysis of tissue staining to computer-aided diagnosis, and prognosis of breast cancer patients.

541 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
02 Apr 2014-JAMA
TL;DR: To maximize the benefit of mammography screening, decisions should be individualized based on patients' risk profiles and preferences.
Abstract: Importance Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths among US women. Mammography screening may be associated with reduced breast cancer mortality but can also cause harm. Guidelines recommend individualizing screening decisions, particularly for younger women. Objectives We reviewed the evidence on the mortality benefit and chief harms of mammography screening and what is known about how to individualize mammography screening decisions, including communicating risks and benefits to patients. Evidence Acquisition We searched MEDLINE from 1960-2014 to describe (1) benefits of mammography, (2) harms of mammography, and (3) individualizing screening decisions and promoting informed decision making. We also manually searched reference lists of key articles retrieved, selected reviews, meta-analyses, and practice recommendations. We rated the level of evidence using the American Heart Association guidelines. Results Mammography screening is associated with a 19% overall reduction of breast cancer mortality (approximately 15% for women in their 40s and 32% for women in their 60s). For a 40- or 50-year-old woman undergoing 10 years of annual mammograms, the cumulative risk of a false-positive result is about 61%. About 19% of the cancers diagnosed during that 10-year period would not have become clinically apparent without screening (overdiagnosis), although there is uncertainty about this estimate. The net benefit of screening depends greatly on baseline breast cancer risk, which should be incorporated into screening decisions. Decision aids have the potential to help patients integrate information about risks and benefits with their own values and priorities, although they are not yet widely available for use in clinical practice. Conclusions and Relevance To maximize the benefit of mammography screening, decisions should be individualized based on patients’ risk profiles and preferences. Risk models and decision aids are useful tools, but more research is needed to optimize these and to further quantify overdiagnosis. Research should also explore other breast cancer screening strategies.

404 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Initial results show a better sensitivity of CESM and MRI in breast cancer detection than MG and a good correlation with postoperative histology in size assessment, compared with histopathology.
Abstract: To compare mammography (MG), contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the detection and size estimation of histologically proven breast cancers using postoperative histology as the gold standard. After ethical approval, 80 women with newly diagnosed breast cancer underwent MG, CESM, and MRI examinations. CESM was reviewed by an independent experienced radiologist, and the maximum dimension of suspicious lesions was measured. For MG and MRI, routine clinical reports of breast specialists, with judgment based on the BI-RADS lexicon, were used. Results of each imaging technique were correlated to define the index cancer. Fifty-nine cases could be compared to postoperative histology for size estimation. Breast cancer was visible in 66/80 MG, 80/80 CESM, and 77/79 MRI examinations. Average lesion largest dimension was 27.31 mm (SD 22.18) in MG, 31.62 mm (SD 24.41) in CESM, and 27.72 mm (SD 21.51) in MRI versus 32.51 mm (SD 29.03) in postoperative histology. No significant difference was found between lesion size measurement on MRI and CESM compared with histopathology. Our initial results show a better sensitivity of CESM and MRI in breast cancer detection than MG and a good correlation with postoperative histology in size assessment. • Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) is slowly being introduced into clinical practice. • Access to breast MRI is limited by availability and lack of reimbursement. • Initial results show a better sensitivity of CESM and MRI than conventional mammography. • CESM showed a good correlation with postoperative histology in size assessment. • Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography offers promise, seemingly providing information comparable to MRI.

260 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Participation in mammography screening programs in Canada was associated with substantially reduced breast cancer mortality, and there was no evidence that self-selection biased the reported mortality results.
Abstract: Methods Canadian breast screening programs were invited to participate in a study aimed at comparing breast cancer mortality in participants and nonparticipants. Seven of 12 programs, representing 85% of the Canadian population, participated in the study. Data were obtained from the screening programs and corresponding cancer registries on screening mammograms and breast cancer diagnoses and deaths for the period between 1990 and 2009. Standardized mortality ratios were calculated comparing observed mortality in participants to that expected based upon nonparticipant rates. A substudy using data from British Columbia women aged 35 to 44 years was conducted to assess the potential effect of self-selection participation bias. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results Data were obtained on 2 796 472 screening participants. The average breast cancer mortality among participants was 40% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 33% to 48%), lower than expected with a range across provinces of 27% to 59%. Age at entry into screening did not greatly affect the magnitude of the average reduction in mortality, which varied between 35% and 44% overall. The substudy found no evidence that self-selection biased the reported mortality results, although the confidence intervals of this assessment were wide. Conclusion Participation in mammography screening programs in Canada was associated with substantially reduced breast

208 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Evidence supports a less invasive surgical approach to the staging and management of the axilla in select patients and the advent of molecular and genomic profiling is a paradigm shift in the treatment of a biologically heterogenous disease.
Abstract: Breast cancer is the most common cancer affecting women worldwide. Prediction models stratify a woman's risk for developing cancer and can guide screening recommendations based on the presence of known and quantifiable hormonal, environmental, personal, or genetic risk factors. Mammography remains the mainstay breast cancer screening and detection but magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound have become useful diagnostic adjuncts in select patient populations. The management of breast cancer has seen much refinement with increased specialization and collaboration with multidisciplinary teams that include surgeons, oncologists, radiation oncologists, nurses, geneticist, reconstructive surgeons and patients. Evidence supports a less invasive surgical approach to the staging and management of the axilla in select patients. In the era of patient/tumor specific management, the advent of molecular and genomic profiling is a paradigm shift in the treatment of a biologically heterogenous disease.

206 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article attempts to bound uncertainty by providing a range of estimates-optimistic and pessimistic--on the absolute frequency of 3 outcomes important to the mammography decision: breast cancer deaths avoided, false alarms, and overdiagnosis.
Abstract: Like all early detection strategies, screening mammography involves trade-offs. If women are to truly participate in the decision of whether or not to be screened, they need some quantification of its benefits and harms. Providing such information is a challenging task, however, given the uncertainty—and underlying professional disagreement—about the data. In this article, we attempt to bound this uncertainty by providing a range of estimates—optimistic and pessimistic—on the absolute frequency of 3 outcomes important to the mammography decision: breast cancer deaths avoided, false alarms, and overdiagnosis. Among 1000 US women aged 50 years who are screened annually for a decade, 0.3 to 3.2 will avoid a breast cancer death, 490 to 670 will have at least 1 false alarm, and 3 to 14 will be overdiagnosed and treated needlessly. We hope that these ranges help women to make a decision: either to feel comfortable about their decision to pursue screening or to feel equally comfortable about their decision not to pursue screening. For the remainder, we hope it helps start a conversation about where additional precision is most needed.

189 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
02 Apr 2014-JAMA
TL;DR: Providing information about life expectancy along with potential benefits and harms of screening may help older women's decision-making about screening mammography, and should emphasize increased potential harms from screening and highlight health promotion measures likely to be beneficial over the short term.
Abstract: Importance Guidelines recommend individualizing screening mammography decisions for women aged 75 years and older. However, little pragmatic guidance is available to help counsel patients. Objective To provide an evidence-based approach for individualizing decision-making about screening mammography in older women. Evidence Acquisition We searched PubMed for English-language studies in peer-reviewed journals published from January 1, 1990, to February 1, 2014, to identify risk factors for late-life breast cancer in women aged 65 years and older and to quantify the benefits and harms of screening mammography for women aged 75 years and older. Findings Age is the major risk factor for developing and dying from breast cancer. Breast cancer risk factors that reflect hormonal exposures in the distant past, such as age at first birth or age at menarche, are less predictive of late-life breast cancer than factors indicating recent hormonal exposures such as high bone mass or obesity. Randomized trials of the benefits of screening mammography did not include women older than 74 years. Thus it is not known if screening mammography benefits older women. Observational studies favor extending screening mammography to older women who have a life expectancy of more than 10 years. Modeling studies estimate 2 fewer breast cancer deaths/1000 women who in their 70s continue biennial screening for 10 years instead of stopping screening at age 69. Potential harms of continued screening over 10 years include false-positive mammograms in approximately 200/1000 women screened and overdiagnosis (ie, finding breast cancer that would not have clinically surfaced otherwise) in approximately 13/1000 women screened. Providing information about life expectancy along with potential benefits and harms of screening may help older women’s decision-making about screening mammography. Conclusions and Relevance For women with less than a 10-year life expectancy, recommendations to stop screening mammography should emphasize increased potential harms from screening and highlight health promotion measures likely to be beneficial over the short term. For women with a life expectancy of more than 10 years, deciding whether potential benefits of screening outweigh harms becomes a value judgment for patients, requiring a realistic understanding of screening outcomes.

187 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The data support the clinical implementation of DBT in breast cancer screening; however, larger prospective trials are needed to validate the findings in specific patient subgroups.
Abstract: Screening mammography, despite ongoing controversy regarding its risk-benefit ratio, remains the mainstay of early breast cancer detection (1,2) Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), a relatively new x-ray technology (3,4) that images the breast in 3-D, has shown promise in addressing some limitations of conventional mammography by alleviating the effect of superimposed structures that can lead to erroneous interpretations (5–8) This new technology is increasingly implemented in breast clinics across the country, despite relatively little data on its clinical outcomes and effectiveness in specific patient populations (9) Early enthusiasm for DBT is based mostly on retrospective reader studies that compared DBT combined with digital mammography (DM) imaging vs DM alone These studies demonstrated reductions of up to 30% to 40% in false-positives, with similar or slightly improved cancer detection (6,10–12) In the United States, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval was granted to a single vendor in 2011 (Hologic, Inc, Bedford, MA) based on a large multicenter retrospective reader study that demonstrated statistically significant improvement in performance when DBT was combined with DM (13,14) More recently, two prospective European trials have also shown improvements in screening outcomes with DBT An interim analysis from the Oslo Screening Trial (n = 12631) and the final results from the Italian Screening with Tomosynthesis or Standard Mammography Trial (STORM, n = 7292) have demonstrated reductions in recalls of 15% to 17% and improvements in cancer detection of 33% to 53% (15,16) Furthermore, in the Oslo trial there was a 40% increase in the detection of invasive cancers with a stable rate of in situ cancer detection However, in both of these trials subject compliance with screening invitations was less than 100%, and there were complex reading protocols requiring at least two readers per case, which is uncommon in clinical practices in the United States More recently, two separate US centers have reported early results from DBT screening (17,18) These data again demonstrate improvements in outcomes with reductions in recalls up to 37% and increases in cancer detection up to 35% At both sites, however, there was concurrent screening with DM alone and, therefore, a potential for bias in the selection of patients screened with DBT and potentially imaged with DBT at recall In a recent report from a consortium of 13 US practices, a 15% reduction in recall rate and a 29% increase in cancer detection were seen with DBT screening compared with DM alone screening However, no patient-level data was reported, and eleven of the thirteen sites had concurrent DM screening, leading to possible biases in selection of patients for DBT (19) Here we report the patient-level outcomes of implementing DBT screening for the entire screening population at our institution beginning October 2011 We compare outcomes for the cohort screened with DBT over a period of 17 months to the cohort screened with DM alone during the 12 months prior to DBT implementation All women presenting for routine screening were imaged with DBT after its implementation, and radiologist readers remained the same over the DM and DBT cohorts, providing a “pre and post” comparison of DBT to DM-alone screening

179 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: SM alone or in combination with tomosynthesis is comparable in performance to FFDM alone orIn combination withTomosynthesis and may eliminate the need for FFDM as part of a routine clinical study.
Abstract: The use of synthetic mammography in lieu of full-field digital mammography (FFDM), whether alone or in combination with tomosynthesis data sets, does not result in any clinically meaningful differences in diagnostic accuracy and may eliminate the need for FFDM as part of a routine clinical study.

Journal ArticleDOI
21 Jan 2014-PLOS ONE
TL;DR: A method is presented for estimation of dense breast tissue volume from mammograms obtained with full-field digital mammography (FFDM) by comparing the volume estimates with volumes obtained by semi-automatic segmentation of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data.
Abstract: Objectives To objectively evaluate automatic volumetric breast density assessment in Full-Field Digital Mammograms (FFDM) using measurements obtained from breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). Material and Methods A commercially available method for volumetric breast density estimation on FFDM is evaluated by comparing volume estimates obtained from 186 FFDM exams including mediolateral oblique (MLO) and cranial-caudal (CC) views to objective reference standard measurements obtained from MRI. Results Volumetric measurements obtained from FFDM show high correlation with MRI data. Pearson’s correlation coefficients of 0.93, 0.97 and 0.85 were obtained for volumetric breast density, breast volume and fibroglandular tissue volume, respectively. Conclusions Accurate volumetric breast density assessment is feasible in Full-Field Digital Mammograms and has potential to be used in objective breast cancer risk models and personalized screening.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A set of computational tools to aid segmentation and detection of mammograms that contained mass or masses in CC and MLO views and a method for detection and segmentation of masses using multiple thresholding, wavelet transform and genetic algorithm is employed in mammograms.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The prediction of the diagnosis could be improved by the interpretation of a significant number of cases in the presence of 6 % benign contrast enhancement in this study and DE-CESM shows greater consistency than mammography alone by interobserver blind reading.
Abstract: To analyse the accuracy of dual-energy contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in dense breasts in comparison with contrast-enhanced subtracted mammography (CESM) and conventional mammography (Mx). CESM cases of dense breasts with histological proof were evaluated in the present study. Four radiologists with varying experience in mammography interpretation blindly read Mx first, followed by CESM. The diagnostic profiles, consistency and learning curve were analysed statistically. One hundred lesions (28 benign and 72 breast malignancies) in 89 females were analysed. Use of CESM improved the cancer diagnosis by 21.2 % in sensitivity (71.5 % to 92.7 %), by 16.1 % in specificity (51.8 % to 67.9 %) and by 19.8 % in accuracy (65.9 % to 85.8 %) compared with Mx. The interobserver diagnostic consistency was markedly higher using CESM than using Mx alone (0.6235 vs. 0.3869 using the kappa ratio). The probability of a correct prediction was elevated from 80 % to 90 % after 75 consecutive case readings. CESM provided additional information with consistent improvement of the cancer diagnosis in dense breasts compared to Mx alone. The prediction of the diagnosis could be improved by the interpretation of a significant number of cases in the presence of 6 % benign contrast enhancement in this study. • DE-CESM improves the cancer diagnosis in dense breasts compared with mammography. • DE-CESM shows greater consistency than mammography alone by interobserver blind reading. • Diagnostic improvement of DE-CESM is independent of the mammographic reading experience.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: CESM increases diagnostic performance of conventional mammography, even in lower prevalence patient populations such as referrals from breast cancer screening, and is feasible in the workflow of referrals from routine breast screening.
Abstract: Objectives Feasibility studies have shown that contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) increases diagnostic accuracy of mammography. We studied diagnostic accuracy of CESM in patients referred from the breast cancer screening programme, who have a lower disease prevalence than previously published papers on CESM.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: An expert literature review on the value of breast MRI in diagnosing and staging breast cancer, as well as the future potentials of new MRI technologies are conducted.
Abstract: Early detection and diagnosis of breast cancer are essential for successful treatment. Currently mammography and ultrasound are the basic imaging techniques for the detection and localization of breast tumors. The low sensitivity and specificity of these imaging tools resulted in a demand for new imaging modalities and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has become increasingly important in the detection and delineation of breast cancer in daily practice. However, the clinical benefits of the use of pre-operative MRI in women with newly diagnosed breast cancer is still a matter of debate. The main additional diagnostic value of MRI relies on specific situations such as detecting multifocal, multicentric or contralateral disease unrecognized on conventional assessment (particularly in patients diagnosed with invasive lobular carcinoma), assessing the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, detection of cancer in dense breast tissue, recognition of an occult primary breast cancer in patients presenting with cancer metastasis in axillary lymph nodes, among others. Nevertheless, the development of new MRI technologies such as diffusion-weighted imaging, proton spectroscopy and higher field strength 7.0 T imaging offer a new perspective in providing additional information in breast abnormalities. We conducted an expert literature review on the value of breast MRI in diagnosing and staging breast cancer, as well as the future potentials of new MRI technologies.

Journal ArticleDOI
17 Jun 2014-BMJ
TL;DR: Invitation to modern mammography screening may reduce deaths from breast cancer by about 28%, based on the observed mortality reduction combined with the all cause and breast cancer specific mortality in Norway in 2009.
Abstract: ObjectiveTo evaluatethe effectivenessof contemporarymammography screening using individual information about screening history and breast cancer mortality from public screening programmes. Design Prospective cohort study of Norwegian women who were followed between 1986 and 2009. Within that period (1995-2005), a national mammography screening programme was gradually implemented, with biennial invitations sent to women aged 50-69 years. Participants All Norwegian women aged 50-79 between 1986 and 2009. Main outcome measures Multiple Poisson regression analysis was used to estimate breast cancer mortality rate ratios comparing women who were invited to screening (intention to screen) with women who were not invited, with a clear distinction between cases of breast cancer diagnosed before (without potential for screening effect) and after (with potential for screening effect) the first invitation for screening. We took competing causes of death into account by censoring women from further follow-up who died from other causes. Based on the observed mortality reduction combined with the all cause and breast cancer specific mortality in Norway in 2009, we used the CISNET (Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network) Stanford simulation model to estimate how many women would need to be invited to biennial mammography screening in the age group 50-69 years to prevent one breast cancer death during their lifetime. Results During 15 193 034 person years of observation (1986-2009), deaths from breast cancer occurred in 1175 women with a diagnosis after being invited to screening and 8996 women who had not been invited before diagnosis. After adjustment for age, birth cohort, county of residence, and national trends in deaths from breast cancer, the mortality rate ratio associated with being invited to mammography screening was 0.72 (95% confidence interval 0.64 to 0.79). To prevent one death from breast cancer, 368 (95% confidence interval 266 to 508) women would need to be invited to screening.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Most breast cancers detected at screening US were not seen at mammography, even in retrospect, and 19% had subtle or evident findings missed at Mammography.
Abstract: Our review of the mammograms of breast cancers detected at screening US revealed that 263 (78%) of 335 tumors were obscured by overlapping breast tissue, 63 (19%) were misread owing to interpretive errors, and nine (3%) were not included owing to difficult anatomic location or poor positioning.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Current imaging with US, CT, MR, and PET appears suboptimal in the detection of an imaging abnormality associated with BIA ALCL, suggesting the need for better understanding of the spectrum of imaging findingsassociated with Bia ALCL by breast imagers.
Abstract: Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA ALCL) is a newly described clinicopathologic entity. The purpose of this study is to describe the imaging findings of patients with BIA ALCL and determine their sensitivity and specificity in the detection of the presence of an effusion or a mass related to BIA ALCL. A retrospective search was performed of our files as well as of the world literature for patients with pathologically proven BIA ALCL who had been assessed by any imaging study including ultrasound (US), computerized tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or positron emission tomography (PET)–CT, as well as mammography. The sensitivity and specificity of each imaging modality in the detection of an effusion or a mass around breast implants was determined. We identified 44 patients who had BIA ALCL and imaging studies performed between 1997 and 2013. The sensitivity for detecting an effusion was 84, 55, 82, and 38 %, and for detecting a mass was 46, 50, 50, and 64 %, by US, CT, MRI, and PET, respectively. The sensitivity of mammography in the detection of an abnormality without distinction of effusion or mass was 73 %, and specificity 50 %. Progression-free survival was worse in patients with an implant-associated mass (p = 0.001). Conclusions: Current imaging with US, CT, MR, and PET appears suboptimal in the detection of an imaging abnormality associated with BIA ALCL. This under diagnosis may reflect a lack of awareness of this rare entity suggesting the need for better understanding of the spectrum of imaging findings associated with BIA ALCL by breast imagers.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The transition to digital breast cancer screening in the United States increased total costs for small added health benefits and the value of digital mammography screening among women aged 40 to 49 years depends on women's preferences regarding false positives.
Abstract: textBackground Compared with film, digital mammography has superior sensitivity but lower specificity for women aged 40 to 49 years and women with dense breasts. Digital has replaced film in virtually all US facilities, but overall population health and cost from use of this technology are unclear. Methods Using five independent models, we compared digital screening strategies starting at age 40 or 50 years applied annually, biennially, or based on density with biennial film screening from ages 50 to 74 years and with no screening. Common data elements included cancer incidence and test performance, both modified by breast density. Lifetime outcomes included mortality, quality-adjusted life-years, and screening and treatment costs. Results For every 1000 women screened biennially from age 50 to 74 years, switching to digital from film yielded a median within-model improvement of 2 life-years, 0.27 additional deaths averted, 220 additional false-positive results, and $0.35 million more in costs. For an individual woman, this translates to a health gain of 0.73 days. Extending biennial digital screening to women ages 40 to 49 years was cost-effective, although results were sensitive to quality-of-life decrements related to screening and false positives. Targeting annual screening by density yielded similar outcomes to targeting by age. Annual screening approaches could increase costs to $5.26 million per 1000 women, in part because of higher numbers of screens and false positives, and were not efficient or cost-effective. Conclusions The transition to digital breast cancer screening in the United States increased total costs for small added health benefits. The value of digital mammography screening among women aged 40 to 49 years depends on women's preferences regarding false positives.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors evaluated whether introduction of MRI surveillance improves 5-and 10-year survival of high-risk women and determine the accuracy of MRI breast cancer detection compared with mammography-only or no enhanced surveillance and compare size and pathology of cancers detected in women screened with MRI + mammography and mammography only.
Abstract: Women with a genetic predisposition to breast cancer tend to develop the disease at a younger age with denser breasts making mammography screening less effective. The introduction of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for familial breast cancer screening programs in recent years was intended to improve outcomes in these women. We aimed to assess whether introduction of MRI surveillance improves 5- and 10-year survival of high-risk women and determine the accuracy of MRI breast cancer detection compared with mammography-only or no enhanced surveillance and compare size and pathology of cancers detected in women screened with MRI + mammography and mammography only. We used data from two prospective studies where asymptomatic women with a very high breast cancer risk were screened by either mammography alone or with MRI also compared with BRCA1/2 carriers with no intensive surveillance. 63 cancers were detected in women receiving MRI + mammography and 76 in women receiving mammography only. Sensitivity of MRI + mammography was 93 % with 63 % specificity. Fewer cancers detected on MRI were lymph node positive compared to mammography/no additional screening. There were no differences in 10-year survival between the MRI + mammography and mammography-only groups, but survival was significantly higher in the MRI-screened group (95.3 %) compared to no intensive screening (73.7 %; p = 0.002). There were no deaths among the 21 BRCA2 carriers receiving MRI. There appears to be benefit from screening with MRI, particularly in BRCA2 carriers. Extended follow-up of larger numbers of high-risk women is required to assess long-term survival.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Using breast MRI for screening in high-risk women is increasing, and there is a need to improve appropriate use, including among women who may benefit from screening breast MRI.
Abstract: Importance Breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly used for breast cancer screening, diagnostic evaluation, and surveillance. However, we lack data on national patterns of breast MRI use in community practice. Objective To describe patterns of breast MRI use in US community practice during the period 2005 through 2009. Design, Setting, and Participants Observational cohort study using data collected from 2005 through 2009 on breast MRI and mammography from 5 national Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium registries. Data included 8931 breast MRI examinations and 1 288 924 screening mammograms from women aged 18 to 79 years. Main Outcomes and Measures We calculated the rate of breast MRI examinations per 1000 women with breast imaging within the same year and described the clinical indications for the breast MRI examinations by year and age. We compared women screened with breast MRI to women screened with mammography alone for patient characteristics and lifetime breast cancer risk. Results The overall rate of breast MRI from 2005 through 2009 nearly tripled from 4.2 to 11.5 examinations per 1000 women, with the most rapid increase from 2005 to 2007 ( P = .02). The most common clinical indication was diagnostic evaluation (40.3%), followed by screening (31.7%). Compared with women who received screening mammography alone, women who underwent screening breast MRI were more likely to be younger than 50 years, white non-Hispanic, and nulliparous and to have a personal history of breast cancer, a family history of breast cancer, and extremely dense breast tissue (all P 20%) increased during the study period from 9% in 2005 to 29% in 2009. Conclusions and Relevance Use of breast MRI for screening in high-risk women is increasing. However, our findings suggest that there is a need to improve appropriate use, including among women who may benefit from screening breast MRI.

Journal ArticleDOI
Zhiqiong Wang1, Ge Yu1, Yan Kang1, Yingjie Zhao, Qixun Qu1 
TL;DR: Comparing breast tumor detection based on Support Vector Machines (SVM), with ELM, not only does ELM have a better classification accuracy than SVM, but it also has a greatly improved training speed.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Screening with annual MRI combined with mammography has the potential to be effectively implemented into an organized breast screening program for women at high risk for breast cancer and could be considered an important management option for known BRCA gene mutation carriers.
Abstract: Purpose Results The recall rate was significantly higher among women who had abnormal MRI alone (15.1%; 95% CI, 13.8% to 16.4%) compared with mammogram alone (6.4%; 95% CI, 5.5% to 7.3%). Of the 35 breast cancers detected (16.3 per 1,000; 95% CI, 11.2 to 22.2), none were detected by mammogram alone, 23 (65.7%) were detected by MRI alone (10.7 per 1,000; 95% CI, 6.7 to 15.8), and 25 (71%) were detected among women who were known gene mutation carriers (30.8 per 1,000, 95% CI, 19.4 to 43.7). The positive predictive value was highest for detection based on mammogram and MRI (12.4%; 95% CI, 7.3% to 19.3%). Conclusion Screening with annual MRI combined with mammography has the potential to be effectively implemented into an organized breast screening program for women at high risk for breast cancer. This could be considered an important management option for known BRCA gene mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol 32:2224-2230. © 2014 by American Society of Clinical Oncology

01 Jan 2014
TL;DR: An evaluation and comparison of the performance of two different classification methods used to classify the normal and abnormal patterns are presented and the experimental result suggest that Artificial Neural Network is outperformed the other method.
Abstract: Breast cancer is one of the most common cancer among women around the world. Several techniques are available for detection of breast cancer. Mammography is one of the most effective tools for early detection. The goal of this research is to increase the diagnostic accuracy of image processing and machine learning techniques for optimum classification between normal and abnormalities in digital mammograms. GLCM texture feature extractions are known to be the most common and powerful techniques for texture analysis. This paper presents an evaluation and comparison of the performance of two different classification methods used to classify the normal and abnormal patterns. The experimental result suggest that Artificial Neural Network is outperformed the other method.

Journal ArticleDOI
10 Jul 2014-PLOS ONE
TL;DR: Measurements of the volume and the projected area of the compressed breast during mammography are used to derive estimates of breast tissue stiffness and examine the relationship of stiffness to risk of breast cancer.
Abstract: Background Evidence from animal models shows that tissue stiffness increases the invasion and progression of cancers, including mammary cancer. We here use measurements of the volume and the projected area of the compressed breast during mammography to derive estimates of breast tissue stiffness and examine the relationship of stiffness to risk of breast cancer.

01 Jun 2014
TL;DR: In this article, the authors evaluated whether introduction of MRI surveillance improves 5-and 10-year survival of high-risk women and determine the accuracy of MRI breast cancer detection compared with mammography-only or no enhanced surveillance and compare size and pathology of cancers detected in women screened with MRI + mammography and mammography only.
Abstract: Women with a genetic predisposition to breast cancer tend to develop the disease at a younger age with denser breasts making mammography screening less effective. The introduction of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for familial breast cancer screening programs in recent years was intended to improve outcomes in these women. We aimed to assess whether introduction of MRI surveillance improves 5- and 10-year survival of high-risk women and determine the accuracy of MRI breast cancer detection compared with mammography-only or no enhanced surveillance and compare size and pathology of cancers detected in women screened with MRI + mammography and mammography only. We used data from two prospective studies where asymptomatic women with a very high breast cancer risk were screened by either mammography alone or with MRI also compared with BRCA1/2 carriers with no intensive surveillance. 63 cancers were detected in women receiving MRI + mammography and 76 in women receiving mammography only. Sensitivity of MRI + mammography was 93 % with 63 % specificity. Fewer cancers detected on MRI were lymph node positive compared to mammography/no additional screening. There were no differences in 10-year survival between the MRI + mammography and mammography-only groups, but survival was significantly higher in the MRI-screened group (95.3 %) compared to no intensive screening (73.7 %; p = 0.002). There were no deaths among the 21 BRCA2 carriers receiving MRI. There appears to be benefit from screening with MRI, particularly in BRCA2 carriers. Extended follow-up of larger numbers of high-risk women is required to assess long-term survival.

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Sep 2014-Cancer
TL;DR: The authors determined the decrease in late‐stage cancer incidence and the changes in invasive cancer incidence that occurred in the mammographic era after adjusting for prescreening temporal trends.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Mammographic screening is expected to decrease the incidence of late-stage breast cancer. In the current study, the authors determined the decrease in late-stage cancer incidence and the changes in invasive cancer incidence that occurred in the mammographic era after adjusting for prescreening temporal trends. METHODS: Breast cancer incidence and stage data were obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. The premammography period (1977-1979) was compared with the mammographic screening period (2007-2009) for women aged40 years. The authors estimated prescreening temporal trends using 5 measures of annual percentage change (APC). Stage-specific incidence values from 1977 through 1979 (baseline) were adjusted using APC values of 0.5%, 1.0%, 1.3%, and 2.0% and then compared with observed stage-specific incidence in 2007 through 2009. RESULTS: Prescreening APC temporal trend estimates ranged from 0.8% to 2.3%. The joinpoint estimate of 1.3% for women aged40 years approximated the 4-decade long APC trend of 1.2% noted in the Connecticut Tumor Registry. At an APC of 1.3%, late-stage breast cancer incidence decreased by 37% (56 cases per 100,000 women) with a reciprocal increase in early-stage rates noted from 1977 through 1979 to 2007 through 2009. Resulting late-stage cancer incidence decreased from 21% at an APC of 0.5% to 48% at an APC of 2.0%. Total invasive breast cancer incidence decreased by 9% (27 cases per 100,000 women) at an APC of 1.3%. CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence that a substantial reduction in late-stage breast cancer has occurred in the mammography era when appropriate adjustments are made for prescreening temporal trends. At background APC estimates of1%, the total invasive breast cancer incidence also decreased. Cancer 2014;000:000-000. V C 2014 American Cancer Society.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Use of DBT improves sensitivity and specificity, and there is no longer a need to obtain full-exposure 2D mammograms, and DBT will replace standard2D mammography for breast cancer screening.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to describe the development of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and to describe its advantages over 2D mammography for breast cancer screening. CONCLUSION. Mammographic screening has dramatically reduced breast cancer deaths, but it does not depict all cancer early enough to result in a cure. In addition, because of the recall rates associated with mammography, efforts are underway to reduce access to screening. Use of DBT improves sensitivity and specificity, and there is no longer a need to obtain full-exposure 2D mammograms. DBT will replace standard 2D mammography for breast cancer screening.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is suggested that PAM can image tumor vascularity and oxygenation, which may be useful for diagnosis and characterization of breast cancer.
Abstract: Purpose Photoacoustic tomography can image the hemoglobin distribution and oxygenation state inside tissue with high spatial resolution. The purpose of this study is to investigate its clinical usefulness for diagnosis of breast cancer and evaluation of therapeutic response in relation to other diagnostic modalities.