Dataset Information

Tactile imaging of an imbedded palpable structure for breast cancer screening.

ABSTRACT: Apart from texture, the human finger can sense palpation. The detection of an imbedded structure is a fine balance between the relative stiffness of the matrix, the object, and the device. If the device is too soft, its high responsiveness will limit the depth to which the imbedded structure can be detected. The sensation of palpation is an effective procedure for a physician to examine irregularities. In a clinical breast examination (CBE), by pressing over 1 cm(2) area, at a contact pressure in the 70-90 kPa range, the physician feels cancerous lumps that are 8- to 18-fold stiffer than surrounding tissue. Early detection of a lump in the 5-10 mm range leads to an excellent prognosis. We describe a thin-film tactile device that emulates human touch to quantify CBE by imaging the size and shape of 5-10 mm objects at 20 mm depth in a breast model using ?80 kPa pressure. The linear response of the device allows quantification where the greyscale corresponds to the relative local stiffness. The (background) signal from <2.5-fold stiffer objects at a size below 2 mm is minimal.

SUBMITTER: Van Nguyen C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4173743 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Tactile imaging of an imbedded palpable structure for breast cancer screening.

Van Nguyen Chieu C Saraf Ravi F RF

ACS applied materials & interfaces 20140829 18

Apart from texture, the human finger can sense palpation. The detection of an imbedded structure is a fine balance between the relative stiffness of the matrix, the object, and the device. If the device is too soft, its high responsiveness will limit the depth to which the imbedded structure can be detected. The sensation of palpation is an effective procedure for a physician to examine irregularities. In a clinical breast examination (CBE), by pressing over 1 cm(2) area, at a contact pressure i ...[more]

PMID: 25148477

Similar Datasets

Project description:To determine reasons for nonparticipation in a trial of supplemental screening with magnetic resonance (MR) imaging after mammography and ultrasonography (US).Women(n = 2809) at elevated risk of breast cancer were enrolled in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network 6666 US Screening Protocol at 21 institutions. Fourteen institutions met technical and experience requirements for this institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant substudy of supplemental screening with MR imaging. Those women who had completed 0-, 12-, and 24-month screenings with mammography combined with US were considered for a single contrast material-enhanced MR examination within 8 weeks after completing the 24-month mammography-US screening. A total of 1593 women had complete MR substudy registration data: 378 of them were ineligible for the study, and 1215 had analyzable data. Reasons for nonparticipation were determined. Demographic data were compared between study participants and nonparticipants.Of 1215 women with analyzable data, 703 (57.9%), with a mean age of 54.8 years, were enrolled in the MR substudy and 512 (42.1%) declined participation. Women with a 25% or greater lifetime risk of breast cancer were more likely to participate (odds ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval: 1.10, 2.12). Of 512 nonparticipants, 130 (25.4%) refused owing to claustrophobia; 93 (18.2%), owing to time constraints; 62 (12.1%), owing to financial concerns; 47 (9.2%), because their physician would not provide a referral and/or did not believe MR imaging was indicated; 40 (7.8%), because they were not interested; 39 (7.6%), because they were medically intolerant to MR imaging; 29 (5.7%), because they did not want to undergo intravenous injection; 27 (5.3%), owing to additional biopsy or other procedures that might be required subsequently; 21 (4.1%), owing to MR imaging scheduling constraints; 11 (2.2%), because of the travel required; seven (1.4%), owing to gadolinium-related risks or allergies; and six (1.2%), for unknown reasons.Of 1215 women with elevated breast cancer risk who could, according to protocol guidelines, undergo breast MR imaging, only 57.9% agreed to participate.

Project description:ImportanceFor women with a 20% or more familial risk of breast cancer without a known BRCA1/2 (BRCA1, OMIM 113705; and BRCA2, OMIM 114480) or TP53 (OMIM 151623) variant, screening guidelines vary substantially, and cost-effectiveness analyses are scarce.ObjectiveTo assess the cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) screening strategies for women with a 20% or more familial risk for breast cancer without a known BRCA1/2 or TP53 variant.Design, setting, and participantsIn this economic evaluation, conducted from February 1, 2019, to May 25, 2020, microsimulation modeling was used to estimate costs and effectiveness on a lifetime horizon from age 25 years until death of MRI screening among a cohort of 10 million Dutch women with a 20% or more familial risk for breast cancer without a known BRCA1/2 or TP53 variant. A Dutch screening setting was modeled. Most data were obtained from the randomized Familial MRI Screening (FaMRIsc) trial, which included Dutch women aged 30 to 55 years. A health care payer perspective was applied.InterventionsSeveral screening protocols with varying ages and intervals including those of the randomized FaMRIsc trial, consisting of the mammography (Mx) protocol (annual mammography and clinical breast examination) and the MRI protocol (annual MRI and clinical breast examination plus biennial mammography).Main outcomes and measuresCosts, life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated and discounted by 3%. A threshold of €22 000 (US $24 795.87) per QALY was applied.ResultsThis economic evaluation modeling study estimated that, on a lifetime horizon per 1000 women with the Mx protocol of the FaMRIsc trial, 346 breast cancers would be detected, and 49 women were estimated to die from breast cancer, resulting in 22 885 QALYs and total costs of €7 084 767 (US $7 985 134.61). The MRI protocol resulted in 79 additional QALYs and additional €2 657 266 (US $2 994 964.65). Magnetic resonance imaging performed only every 18 months between the ages of 35 and 60 years followed by the national screening program was considered optimal, with an ICER of €21 380 (US $24 097.08) compared with the previous nondominated strategy in the ranking, when applying the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence threshold. Annual screening alternating MRI and mammography between the ages of 35 and 60 years, followed by the national screening program, gave similar outcomes. Higher thresholds would favor annual MRI screening. The ICER was most sensitive to the unit cost of MRI and the utility value for ductal carcinoma in situ and localized breast cancer.Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that MRI screening every 18 months between the ages of 35 and 60 years for women with a family history of breast cancer is cost-effective within the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence threshold for all densities. Higher thresholds would favor annual MRI screening. These outcomes support a change of current screening guidelines for this specific risk group and support MRI screening.

Dataset Information

Tactile imaging of an imbedded palpable structure for breast cancer screening.

Publications

Tactile imaging of an imbedded palpable structure for breast cancer screening.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets