Showing papers on "Mammography published in 2015"

Breast Cancer Screening for Women at Average Risk: 2015 Guideline Update From the American Cancer Society

Abstract: Importance Breast cancer is a leading cause of premature mortality among US women. Early detection has been shown to be associated with reduced breast cancer morbidity and mortality. Objective To update the American Cancer Society (ACS) 2003 breast cancer screening guideline for women at average risk for breast cancer. Process The ACS commissioned a systematic evidence review of the breast cancer screening literature to inform the update and a supplemental analysis of mammography registry data to address questions related to the screening interval. Formulation of recommendations was based on the quality of the evidence and judgment (incorporating values and preferences) about the balance of benefits and harms. Evidence Synthesis Screening mammography in women aged 40 to 69 years is associated with a reduction in breast cancer deaths across a range of study designs, and inferential evidence supports breast cancer screening for women 70 years and older who are in good health. Estimates of the cumulative lifetime risk of false-positive examination results are greater if screening begins at younger ages because of the greater number of mammograms, as well as the higher recall rate in younger women. The quality of the evidence for overdiagnosis is not sufficient to estimate a lifetime risk with confidence. Analysis examining the screening interval demonstrates more favorable tumor characteristics when premenopausal women are screened annually vs biennially. Evidence does not support routine clinical breast examination as a screening method for women at average risk. Recommendations The ACS recommends that women with an average risk of breast cancer should undergo regular screening mammography starting at age 45 years (strong recommendation). Women aged 45 to 54 years should be screened annually (qualified recommendation). Women 55 years and older should transition to biennial screening or have the opportunity to continue screening annually (qualified recommendation). Women should have the opportunity to begin annual screening between the ages of 40 and 44 years (qualified recommendation). Women should continue screening mammography as long as their overall health is good and they have a life expectancy of 10 years or longer (qualified recommendation). The ACS does not recommend clinical breast examination for breast cancer screening among average-risk women at any age (qualified recommendation). Conclusions and Relevance These updated ACS guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for breast cancer screening for women at average risk of breast cancer. These recommendations should be considered by physicians and women in discussions about breast cancer screening.

Nanoparticle Probes for the Detection of Cancer Biomarkers, Cells, and Tissues by Fluorescence

Abstract: 1.1. Cancer and Early Detection Cancer is the second most common cause of death in the United States, trailing only heart disease in incidence. Despite significant worldwide investment in research, cancer remains responsible for 1 in 4 deaths in developed countries.1 Globally, over 14 million cancer diagnoses were reported in 2012, a figure expected to increase to over 22 million cases per annum in the next two decades.2 Estimated to kill over 1/2 million U.S. citizens, and with over 1.6 million new cases predicted to be diagnosed this year,3 cancer continues to present a major, yet unmet challenge to healthcare both globally and in the United States. Cancer emerges from our own tissues, complicating both detection and treatment methods due to the similarities between the diseased tissue and healthy tissue.4,5 Despite this fact, the mortality rate from cancer is often greatly reduced by early detection of the disease. For example, non-small-cell lung cancer is responsible for the most cancer related deaths worldwide, with patients in the advanced stages of the disease having only 5–15% and <2% 5-year survival rates for stage III and IV patients, respectively.6 In contrast, patients who start therapy in the early stages of the disease (stage I) have markedly improved survival rates, with an 80% overall 5-year survival rate.6 Consequently, early diagnosis is essential to improving cancer patient prognosis. At present, clinical detection of cancer primarily relies on imaging techniques or the morphological analysis of cells that are suspected to be diseased (cytology) or tissues (histopathology). Imaging techniques applied to cancer detection, including X-ray, mammography, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), endoscopy, and ultrasound, have low sensitivity and are limited in their ability to differentiate between benign and malignant lesions.7,8 While cytology, such as testing for cervical cancer via a Pap smear or occult blood detection, may be used to distinguish between healthy and diseased cells or tissues, it is not effective at detecting cancer at early stages. Similarly, histopathology, which generally relies on taking a biopsy of a suspected tumor, is typically used to probe the malignancy of tissues that are identified through alternative imaging techniques, such as CT or MRI, and may not be used alone to detect cancer in its early stages. As such, the development of assays and methods for early detection of cancer, before the disease becomes symptomatic, presents a major challenge. Recent research within the field of nanotechnology has focused on addressing the limitations of the currently available methods for cancer diagnosis. Certain nanoparticle probes possess several unique properties that are advantageous for use in the detection of cancer at the early stages. In this review, we will discuss the advances in the development of nanoparticle-based methods for the detection of cancer by fluorescence spectroscopy. We will divide this topic into three categories: techniques that are designed for (1) the detection of extracellular cancer biomarkers, (2) the detection of cancer cells, and (3) the detection of cancerous tissues in vivo. We will discuss these strategies within the context of the nanoparticle probe used as well as the recognition moieties applied in each approach. Ultimately, the translation of these methods from the laboratory to the clinic may enable earlier detection of cancer and could extend patient survival through the ability to administer therapeutic treatment in the early stages of the disease. While this review provides a comprehensive overview of the nanoparticle probes that are used to detect cancer in vitro and in vivo through fluorescence, there are several other relevant reviews that may be of interest to our readers, who may refer to the references for more generalized reviews of nanomaterials used for diagnostics and therapy,9–12 or more detailed insight into the specific types of nanoparticle probes (i.e., quantum dots,13 gold nanoparticles,14,15 upconversion nanoparticles,16 polymer dots,17,18 silica nanoparticles,19 polymeric nanoparticles, 20 etc.) for cancer diagnosis.

Benefits and Harms of Breast Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review

Abstract: Importance Patients need to consider both benefits and harms of breast cancer screening. Objective To systematically synthesize available evidence on the association of mammographic screening and clinical breast examination (CBE) at different ages and intervals with breast cancer mortality, overdiagnosis, false-positive biopsy findings, life expectancy, and quality-adjusted life expectancy. Evidence Review We searched PubMed (to March 6, 2014), CINAHL (to September 10, 2013), and PsycINFO (to September 10, 2013) for systematic reviews, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) (with no limit to publication date), and observational and modeling studies published after January 1, 2000, as well as systematic reviews of all study designs. Included studies (7 reviews, 10 RCTs, 72 observational, 1 modeling) provided evidence on the association between screening with mammography, CBE, or both and prespecified critical outcomes among women at average risk of breast cancer (no known genetic susceptibility, family history, previous breast neoplasia, or chest irradiation). We used summary estimates from existing reviews, supplemented by qualitative synthesis of studies not included in those reviews. Findings Across all ages of women at average risk, pooled estimates of association between mammography screening and mortality reduction after 13 years of follow-up were similar for 3 meta-analyses of clinical trials (UK Independent Panel: relative risk [RR], 0.80 [95% CI, 0.73-0.89]; Canadian Task Force: RR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.74-0.94]; Cochrane: RR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.74-0.87]); were greater in a meta-analysis of cohort studies (RR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.69 to 0.81]); and were comparable in a modeling study (CISNET; median RR equivalent among 7 models, 0.85 [range, 0.77-0.93]). Uncertainty remains about the magnitude of associated mortality reduction in the entire US population, among women 40 to 49 years, and with annual screening compared with biennial screening. There is uncertainty about the magnitude of overdiagnosis associated with different screening strategies, attributable in part to lack of consensus on methods of estimation and the importance of ductal carcinoma in situ in overdiagnosis. For women with a first mammography screening at age 40 years, estimated 10-year cumulative risk of a false-positive biopsy result was higher (7.0% [95% CI, 6.1%-7.8%]) for annual compared with biennial (4.8% [95% CI, 4.4%-5.2%]) screening. Although 10-year probabilities of false-positive biopsy results were similar for women beginning screening at age 50 years, indirect estimates of lifetime probability of false-positive results were lower. Evidence for the relationship between screening and life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy was low in quality. There was no direct evidence for any additional mortality benefit associated with the addition of CBE to mammography, but observational evidence from the United States and Canada suggested an increase in false-positive findings compared with mammography alone, with both studies finding an estimated 55 additional false-positive findings per extra breast cancer detected with the addition of CBE. Conclusions and Relevance For women of all ages at average risk, screening was associated with a reduction in breast cancer mortality of approximately 20%, although there was uncertainty about quantitative estimates of outcomes for different breast cancer screening strategies in the United States. These findings and the related uncertainty should be considered when making recommendations based on judgments about the balance of benefits and harms of breast cancer screening.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Digital Screening Mammography With and Without Computer-Aided Detection

Abstract: Importance After the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved computer-aided detection (CAD) for mammography in 1998, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) provided increased payment in 2002, CAD technology disseminated rapidly. Despite sparse evidence that CAD improves accuracy of mammographic interpretations and costs over $400 million a year, CAD is currently used for most screening mammograms in the United States. Objective To measure performance of digital screening mammography with and without CAD in US community practice. Design, Setting, and Participants We compared the accuracy of digital screening mammography interpreted with (n = 495 818) vs without (n = 129 807) CAD from 2003 through 2009 in 323 973 women. Mammograms were interpreted by 271 radiologists from 66 facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Linkage with tumor registries identified 3159 breast cancers in 323 973 women within 1 year of the screening. Main Outcomes and Measures Mammography performance (sensitivity, specificity, and screen-detected and interval cancers per 1000 women) was modeled using logistic regression with radiologist-specific random effects to account for correlation among examinations interpreted by the same radiologist, adjusting for patient age, race/ethnicity, time since prior mammogram, examination year, and registry. Conditional logistic regression was used to compare performance among 107 radiologists who interpreted mammograms both with and without CAD. Results Screening performance was not improved with CAD on any metric assessed. Mammography sensitivity was 85.3% (95% CI, 83.6%-86.9%) with and 87.3% (95% CI, 84.5%-89.7%) without CAD. Specificity was 91.6% (95% CI, 91.0%-92.2%) with and 91.4% (95% CI, 90.6%-92.0%) without CAD. There was no difference in cancer detection rate (4.1 in 1000 women screened with and without CAD). Computer-aided detection did not improve intraradiologist performance. Sensitivity was significantly decreased for mammograms interpreted with vs without CAD in the subset of radiologists who interpreted both with and without CAD (odds ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.29-0.97). Conclusions and Relevance Computer-aided detection does not improve diagnostic accuracy of mammography. These results suggest that insurers pay more for CAD with no established benefit to women.

Cancer screening test use - United States, 2013.

Abstract: Regular breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with timely and appropriate follow-up and treatment reduces deaths from these cancers. Healthy People 2020 targets for cancer screening test use have been established, based on the most recent U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines. National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data are used to monitor progress toward the targets. CDC used the 2013 NHIS, the most recent data available, to examine breast, cervical, and CRC screening use. Although some demographic subgroups attained targets, screening use overall was below the targets with no improvements from 2010 to 2013 in breast, cervical, or CRC screening use. Cervical cancer screening declined from 2010 to 2013. Increased efforts are needed to achieve targets and reduce screening disparities.

Breast MRI: EUSOBI recommendations for women's information.

Abstract: This paper summarizes information about breast MRI to be provided to women and referring physicians. After listing contraindications, procedure details are described, stressing the need for correct scheduling and not moving during the examination. The structured report including BI-RADS® categories and further actions after a breast MRI examination are discussed. Breast MRI is a very sensitive modality, significantly improving screening in high-risk women. It also has a role in clinical diagnosis, problem solving, and staging, impacting on patient management. However, it is not a perfect test, and occasionally breast cancers can be missed. Therefore, clinical and other imaging findings (from mammography/ultrasound) should also be considered. Conversely, MRI may detect lesions not visible on other imaging modalities turning out to be benign (false positives). These risks should be discussed with women before a breast MRI is requested/performed. Because breast MRI drawbacks depend upon the indication for the examination, basic information for the most important breast MRI indications is presented. Seventeen notes and five frequently asked questions formulated for use as direct communication to women are provided. The text was reviewed by Europa Donna–The European Breast Cancer Coalition to ensure that it can be easily understood by women undergoing MRI. • Information on breast MRI concerns advantages/disadvantages and preparation to the examination • Claustrophobia, implantable devices, allergic predisposition, and renal function should be checked • Before menopause, scheduling on day 7–14 of the cycle is preferred • During the examination, it is highly important that the patient keeps still • Availability of prior examinations improves accuracy of breast MRI interpretation

Assessing Improvement in Detection of Breast Cancer with Three-dimensional Automated Breast US in Women with Dense Breast Tissue: The SomoInsight Study

Abstract: The results of this study indicated that there is an increase in cancer detection with use of automated breast US supplemented to mammography among women with dense breasts, producing detection of an additional 1.9 cancers, most of which were clinically important, per 1000 women screened at the cost of a higher recall rate.

Benefits and harms of mammography screening

Abstract: Mammography screening for breast cancer is widely available in many countries. Initially praised as a universal achievement to improve women's health and to reduce the burden of breast cancer, the benefits and harms of mammography screening have been debated heatedly in the past years. This review discusses the benefits and harms of mammography screening in light of findings from randomized trials and from more recent observational studies performed in the era of modern diagnostics and treatment. The main benefit of mammography screening is reduction of breast-cancer related death. Relative reductions vary from about 15 to 25% in randomized trials to more recent estimates of 13 to 17% in meta-analyses of observational studies. Using UK population data of 2007, for 1,000 women invited to biennial mammography screening for 20 years from age 50, 2 to 3 women are prevented from dying of breast cancer. All-cause mortality is unchanged. Overdiagnosis of breast cancer is the main harm of mammography screening. Based on recent estimates from the United States, the relative amount of overdiagnosis (including ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive cancer) is 31%. This results in 15 women overdiagnosed for every 1,000 women invited to biennial mammography screening for 20 years from age 50. Women should be unpassionately informed about the benefits and harms of mammography screening using absolute effect sizes in a comprehensible fashion. In an era of limited health care resources, screening services need to be scrutinized and compared with each other with regard to effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and harms.

Triple-Modality Screening Trial for Familial Breast Cancer Underlines the Importance of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Questions the Role of Mammography and Ultrasound Regardless of Patient Mutation Status, Age, and Breast Density

Abstract: Purpose To evaluate the breast cancer screening efficacy of mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in a high-risk population and in various population subgroups. Patients and Methods In a single-center, prospective, nonrandomized comparison study, BRCA mutation carriers and women with a high familial risk (> 20% lifetime risk) for breast cancer were offered screening with mammography, ultrasound, and MRI every 12 months. Diagnostic performance was compared between individual modalities and their combinations. Further comparisons were based on subpopulations dichotomized by screening rounds, mutation status, age, and breast density. Results There were 559 women with 1,365 complete imaging rounds included in this study. The sensitivity of MRI (90.0%) was significantly higher (P < .001) than that of mammography (37.5%) and ultrasound (37.5%). Of 40 cancers, 18 (45.0%) were detected by MRI alone. Two cancers were found by mammography alone (a ductal carcinoma in situ [DCIS] with microin...

Mammographic breast density: impact on breast cancer risk and implications for screening.

Abstract: Mammographic breast density is rapidly becoming a hot topic in both the medical literature and the lay press. In the United States, recent legislative changes in 19 states now require radiologists to notify patients regarding breast density as well as the possible need for supplemental screening. Federal legislation regarding breast density notification has been introduced, and its passage is likely on the horizon. An understanding of the context, scientific evidence, and controversies surrounding the topic of breast density as a risk factor for breast cancer is critical for radiologists. The current state of evidence is presented regarding supplemental screening for women with dense breasts, including the use of digital breast tomosynthesis, whole-breast ultrasonography, and gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. A review of current practice guidelines and additional sources of information will improve radiologists' understanding of the relevant subject of breast density and enable them to respond appropriately to questions from patients, clinicians, and the media.

Identifying women with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer: a cohort study.

Abstract: High breast density increases breast cancer risk and can mask tumors, decreasing the sensitivity of mammography. This cohort study sought to better direct supplemental imaging discussions by determ...

Screening Breast Ultrasound: Past, Present, and Future

Abstract: OBJECTIVE. This article discusses breast ultrasound for the detection of breast cancer in the screening environment, as well as strategies for integrating screening breast ultrasound, including automated breast ultrasound. CONCLUSION. Breast density is an increasingly pertinent issue in breast cancer diagnosis. Breast density results in a decrease in the sensitivity of mammography for cancer detection, with a significant increase in the risk of breast cancer. Ultrasound detects additional cancers.

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: State of the Art.

Abstract: If digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is performed on the basis of an abnormal screening mammogram, then the sensitivity of DBT cannot exceed that of mammography.

Breast Density and Benign Breast Disease: Risk Assessment to Identify Women at High Risk of Breast Cancer

Abstract: Purpose Women with proliferative breast lesions are candidates for primary prevention, but few risk models incorporate benign findings to assess breast cancer risk. We incorporated benign breast disease (BBD) diagnoses into the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) risk model, the only breast cancer risk assessment tool that uses breast density. Methods We developed and validated a competing-risk model using 2000 to 2010 SEER data for breast cancer incidence and 2010 vital statistics to adjust for the competing risk of death. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate the relative hazards for age, race/ethnicity, family history of breast cancer, history of breast biopsy, BBD diagnoses, and breast density in the BCSC. Results We included 1,135,977 women age 35 to 74 years undergoing mammography with no history of breast cancer; 17% of the women had a prior breast biopsy. During a mean follow-up of 6.9 years, 17,908 women were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer. The BCSC BBD model sli...

Benefits, Harms, and Cost-Effectiveness of Supplemental Ultrasonography Screening for Women With Dense Breasts

Abstract: This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of adding supplemental ultrasonography to breast cancer screening with mammography screening for women with dense breasts. The analysis found that adding ...

Breast Cancer Screening, Incidence, and Mortality Across US Counties

Abstract: Importance Screening mammography rates vary considerably by location in the United States, providing a natural opportunity to investigate the associations of screening with breast cancer incidence and mortality, which are subjects of debate. Objective To examine the associations between rates of modern screening mammography and the incidence of breast cancer, mortality from breast cancer, and tumor size. Design, Setting, and Participants An ecological study of 16 million women 40 years or older who resided in 547 counties reporting to the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries during the year 2000. Of these women, 53 207 were diagnosed with breast cancer that year and followed up for the next 10 years. The study covered the period January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2010, and the analysis was performed between April 2013 and March 2015. Exposures Extent of screening in each county, assessed as the percentage of included women who received a screening mammogram in the prior 2 years. Main Outcomes and Measures Breast cancer incidence in 2000 and incidence-based breast cancer mortality during the 10-year follow-up. Incidence and mortality were calculated for each county and age adjusted to the US population. Results Across US counties, there was a positive correlation between the extent of screening and breast cancer incidence (weighted r = 0.54; P r = 0.00; P = .98). An absolute increase of 10 percentage points in the extent of screening was accompanied by 16% more breast cancer diagnoses (relative rate [RR], 1.16; 95% CI, 1.13-1.19) but no significant change in breast cancer deaths (RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.96-1.06). In an analysis stratified by tumor size, we found that more screening was strongly associated with an increased incidence of small breast cancers (≤2 cm) but not with a decreased incidence of larger breast cancers (>2 cm). An increase of 10 percentage points in screening was associated with a 25% increase in the incidence of small breast cancers (RR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.18-1.32) and a 7% increase in the incidence of larger breast cancers (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.12). Conclusions and Relevance When analyzed at the county level, the clearest result of mammography screening is the diagnosis of additional small cancers. Furthermore, there is no concomitant decline in the detection of larger cancers, which might explain the absence of any significant difference in the overall rate of death from the disease. Together, these findings suggest widespread overdiagnosis.

The TOMMY trial: a comparison of TOMosynthesis with digital MammographY in the UK NHS Breast Screening Programme - a multicentre retrospective reading study comparing the diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography with digital mammography alone.

Abstract: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 4. See the HTA programme website for further project information.

Accuracy of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Depicting Breast Cancer Subgroups in a UK Retrospective Reading Study (TOMMY Trial)

Abstract: In this retrospective reading study, we demonstrated a clear improvement in diagnostic accuracy of two-dimensional (2D) mammography with the use of 2D or synthetic 2D mammography plus digital breast tomosynthesis compared with 2D mammography alone, with a significant reduction (56%) in odds of receiving false-positive results.

Effect of mammographic screening from age 40 years on breast cancer mortality in the UK Age trial at 17 years' follow-up: a randomised controlled trial

Abstract: Summary Background Age-specific effects of mammographic screening, and the timing of such effects, are a matter of debate. The results of the UK Age trial, which compared the effect of invitation to annual mammographic screening from age 40 years with commencement of screening at age 50 years on breast cancer mortality, have been reported at 10 years of follow-up and showed no significant difference in mortality between the trial groups. Here, we report the results of the UK Age trial after 17 years of follow-up. Methods Women aged 39–41 from 23 UK NHS Breast Screening Programme units years were randomly assigned by individual randomisation (1:2) to either an intervention group offered annual screening by mammography up to and including the calendar year of their 48th birthday or to a control group receiving usual medical care (invited for screening at age 50 years and every 3 years thereafter). Both groups were stratified by general practice. We compared breast cancer incidence and mortality by time since randomisation. Analyses included all women randomly assigned who could be traced with the National Health Service Central Register and who had not died or emigrated before entry. The primary outcome measures were mortality from breast cancer (defined as deaths with breast cancer coded as the underlying cause of death) and breast cancer incidence, including in-situ, invasive, and total incidence. Because there is an interest in the timing of the mortality effect, we analysed the results in different follow-up periods. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN24647151. Findings Between Oct 14, 1990, and Sept 25, 1997, 160 921 participants were randomly assigned; 53 883 women in the intervention group and 106 953 assigned to usual medical care were included in this analysis. After a median follow-up of 17 years (IQR 16·8–18·8), the rate ratio (RR) for breast cancer mortality was 0·88 (95% CI 0·74–1·04) from tumours diagnosed during the intervention phase. A significant reduction in breast cancer mortality was noted in the intervention group compared with the control group in the first 10 years after diagnosis (RR 0·75, 0·58–0·97) but not thereafter (RR 1·02, 0·80–1·30) from tumours diagnosed during the intervention phase. The overall breast cancer incidence during 17 year follow-up was similar between the intervention group and the control group (RR 0·98, 0·93–1·04). Interpretation Our results support an early reduction in mortality from breast cancer with annual mammography screening in women aged 40–49 years. Further data are needed to fully understand long-term effects. Cumulative incidence figures suggest at worst a small amount of overdiagnosis. Funding National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and the American Cancer Society. Past funding was received from the Medical Research Council, Cancer Research UK, the UK Department of Health, and the US National Cancer Institute.

Journal club: molecular breast imaging at reduced radiation dose for supplemental screening in mammographically dense breasts.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of supplemental screening molecular breast imaging (MBI) in women with mammographically dense breasts after system modifications to permit radiation dose reduction. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. A total of 1651 asymptomatic women with mammographically dense breasts on prior mammography underwent screening mammography and adjunct MBI performed with 300-MBq 99mTc-sestamibi and a direct-conversion (cadmium zinc telluride) gamma camera, both interpreted independently. The cancer detection rate, sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of biopsies performed (PPV3) were determined. RESULTS. In 1585 participants with a complete reference standard, 21 were diagnosed with cancer: two detected by mammography only, 14 by MBI only, three by both modalities, and two by neither. Of 14 participants with cancers detected only by MBI, 11 had invasive disease (median size, 0.9 cm; range, 0.5–4.1 cm). Nine of 11 (82%) were node negative, an...

Convolutional neural networks for mammography mass lesion classification

Abstract: Feature extraction is a fundamental step when mammography image analysis is addressed using learning based approaches. Traditionally, problem dependent handcrafted features are used to represent the content of images. An alternative approach successfully applied in other domains is the use of neural networks to automatically discover good features. This work presents an evaluation of convolutional neural networks to learn features for mammography mass lesions before feeding them to a classification stage. Experimental results showed that this approach is a suitable strategy outperforming the state-of-the-art representation from 79.9% to 86% in terms of area under the ROC curve.

A multi-centre randomised trial comparing ultrasound vs mammography for screening breast cancer in high-risk Chinese women

Abstract: Background Chinese women tend to have small and dense breasts and ultrasound is a common method for breast cancer screening in China. However, its efficacy and cost comparing with mammography has not been evaluated in randomised trials. Methods At 14 breast centres across China during 2008-2010, 13 339 high-risk women aged 30-65 years were randomised to be screened by mammography alone, ultrasound alone, or by both methods at enrollment and 1-year follow-up. Results A total of 12 519 and 8692 women underwent the initial and second screenings, respectively. Among the 30 cancers (of which 15 were stage 0/I) detected, 5 (0.72/1000) were in the mammography group, 11 (1.51/1000) in the ultrasound group, and 14 (2.02/1000) in the combined group (P=0.12). In the combined group, ultrasound detected all the 14 cancers, whereas mammography detected 8, making ultrasound more sensitive (100 vs 57.1%, P=0.04) with a better diagnostic accuracy (0.999 vs 0.766, P=0.01). There was no difference between mammography and ultrasound in specificity (100 vs 99.9%, P=0.51) and positive predictive value (72.7 vs 70.0%; P=0.87). To detect one cancer, the costs of ultrasound, mammography, and combined modality were $7876, $45 253, and $21 599, respectively. Conclusions Ultrasound is superior to mammography for breast cancer screening in high-risk Chinese women.

Breast cancer screening in Saudi Arabia: free but almost no takers.

Abstract: Introduction Mammography ensures early diagnosis and a better chance for treatment and recovery from breast cancer. We conducted a national survey to investigate knowledge and practices of breast cancer screening among Saudi women aged 50 years or older in order to inform the breast cancer national health programs. Materials and methods The Saudi Health Interview Survey is a national multistage survey of individuals aged 15 years or older. The survey included questions on socio-demographic characteristics, tobacco consumption, diet, physical activity, health-care utilization, different health-related behaviors, and self-reported chronic conditions. Female respondents were asked about knowledge and practices of self and clinical breast exams, as well as mammography. Results Between April and June 2013, a total of 10,735 participants completed the survey. Among respondents, 1,135 were women aged 50 years or older and were included in this analysis. About 89% of women reported not having a clinical breast exam in the past year, and 92% reported never having a mammogram. Women living in Al Sharqia had the highest rate of mammography use. Women who were educated, those who had received a routine medical exam within the last two years, and those who were diagnosed with hypertension were more likely to have had a mammogram in the past two years. Discussion Our results show very low rates of breast cancer screening in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, a country with free health services. This calls for educational campaigns to improve breast cancer screening. Addressing the barriers for breast cancer screening is a public health imperative.

Comparison between Breast MRI and Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography

Abstract: Background The main goal of this study was to compare contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with histopathological results and to compare the sensitivity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values for both imaging modalities.

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis–guided Vacuum-assisted Breast Biopsy: Initial Experiences and Comparison with Prone Stereotactic Vacuum-assisted Biopsy

Abstract: The ease with which target lesions were located and biopsy coordinates calculated, including lesion depth, as well as the fact that digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) allows one to directly control the position of the needle versus the target, contributed to a significantly reduced overall procedure time for DBT vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB) versus prone stereotactic VAB (13 vs 29 minutes, respectively).

National Expenditure For False-Positive Mammograms And Breast Cancer Overdiagnoses Estimated At $4 Billion A Year

Abstract: Populationwide mammography screening has been associated with a substantial rise in false-positive mammography findings and breast cancer overdiagnosis. However, there is a lack of current data on ...

Evaluation of low-energy contrast-enhanced spectral mammography images by comparing them to full-field digital mammography using EUREF image quality criteria.

Abstract: Objective Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) examination results in a low-energy (LE) and contrast-enhanced image. The LE appears similar to a full-field digital mammogram (FFDM). Our aim was to evaluate LE CESM image quality by comparing it to FFDM using criteria defined by the European Reference Organization for Quality Assured Breast Screening and Diagnostic Services (EUREF).

Lobular breast cancer series: imaging

Abstract: The limitations of mammography in the detection and evaluation of invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) have long been recognized, presenting real clinical challenges in treatment planning for these tumors. However, advances in mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging present opportunities to improve the diagnosis and preoperative assessment of ILC. The evidence supporting the performance of each imaging modality will be reviewed, specifically as it relates to the pathology of ILC and its subtypes. Further, we will discuss emerging technologies that may be employed to enhance the detection rate and ultimately result in more effective screening and staging of ILC.