Project description:PurposeTo analyze trends in detection method related to breast cancer stage at diagnosis, treatments, and outcomes over time among 40-49-year-old women.Materials and methodsi This study was institutional review board approved, with a waiver of informed consent, and HIPAA compliant. A longitudinal prospective cohort study was conducted of women aged 40-49 years who had primary breast cancer, during 1990-2008, and were identified and tracked by a dedicated registry database (n = 1977). Method of detection--patient detected (PtD), physician detected (PhysD), or mammography detected (MamD)--was chart abstracted. Disease-specific survival and relapse-free survival statistics were calculated by using the Kaplan-Meier method for stage I-IV breast cancer.ResultsA significant increase in the percentage of MamD breast cancer over time (28%-58%) and a concurrent decline in patient and physician detected (Pt/PhysD) breast cancer (73%-42%) (Pearson x(2) = 72.72, P < .001) were observed over time from 1990 to 2008, with an overall increase in lower-stage disease detection and a decrease in higher-stage disease. MamD breast cancer patients were more likely to undergo lumpectomy (67% vs 48% of Pt/PhysD breast cancer patients) and less likely to undergo modified radical mastectomy (25% vs 47% of the Pt/PhysD breast cancer patients) (P < .001). Uncorrected for stage, 13% of MamD breast cancer patients underwent surgery and chemotherapy versus 22% of Pt/PhysD breast cancer patients (P < .001), and 31% of MamD breast cancer patients underwent surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy versus 59% of Pt/PhysD breast cancer patients (x(2) = 305.13, P < .001). Analyzing invasive cancers only, 5-year relapse-free survival for MamD breast cancer patients was 92% versus 88% for Pt/PhysD patients (log-rank test, 12.47; P < .001).ConclusionIncreased mammography-detected breast cancer over time coincided with lower-stage disease detection resulting in reduced treatment and lower rates of recurrence, adding factors to consider when evaluating the benefits of mammography screening of women aged 40-49 years.

Project description:Background: Breast cancer screening practices and the influence of clinical guidelines or recommendations are well documented for physicians, but little is known about the screening practices of nonphysician providers (physician assistants and advanced practice registered nurses). The seven breast cancer screening guidelines or recommendations on the use of mammography have the most variation for screening average-risk women 40-49 years of age. Therefore, to better understand the practices of nonphysicians, this study will compare the practices of physicians with nonphysician providers for women 40-49 years of age. Materials and Methods: Minnesota physicians and nonphysicians were e-mailed an anonymous cross-sectional survey, which asked primary care providers about their mammography screening practices for average-risk women 40-44 and 45-49 years of age and to rate the influence of seven breast cancer screening recommendations on the use of mammography in their practice. Comparisons across providers' demographic and professional characteristics were conducted using chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests, as appropriate, and multivariate logistic regression analyses. Results: Of the respondents who practiced primary care (193 physicians, 50 physician assistants, and 197 advanced practice registered nurses), 66.7% reported recommending mammography for women at ages 40-44 and 77.2% recommended mammography for women at ages 45-49. Nonphysician providers were more likely to recommend screening in both these age groups (p?<?0.05). Having a self-identified interest in women's health was associated with more mammography screening in both age groups. The American Cancer Society guideline was endorsed as influential by the most respondents. Conclusions: Breast cancer screening practices vary between physicians and nonphysician providers for women 40-49 years of age at average risk. Targeted interventions may help reduce practice variation and ensure high-value care.

Project description:Identifying risk factors for breast cancer specific to women in their 40s could inform screening decisions.To determine what factors increase risk for breast cancer in women aged 40 to 49 years and the magnitude of risk for each factor.MEDLINE (January 1996 to the second week of November 2011), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (fourth quarter of 2011), Scopus, reference lists of published studies, and the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.English-language studies and systematic reviews of risk factors for breast cancer in women aged 40 to 49 years. Additional inclusion criteria were applied for each risk factor.Data on participants, study design, analysis, follow-up, and outcomes were abstracted. Study quality was rated by using established criteria, and only studies rated as good or fair were included. Results were summarized by using meta-analysis when sufficient studies were available or from the best evidence based on study quality, size, and applicability when meta-analysis was not possible. Data from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium were analyzed with proportional hazards models by using partly conditional Cox regression. Reference groups for comparisons were set at U.S. population means.Sixty-six studies provided data for estimates. Extremely dense breasts on mammography or first-degree relatives with breast cancer were associated with at least a 2-fold increase in risk for breast cancer. Prior breast biopsy, second-degree relatives with breast cancer, or heterogeneously dense breasts were associated with a 1.5- to 2.0-fold increased risk; current use of oral contraceptives, nulliparity, and age 30 years or older at first birth were associated with a 1.0- to 1.5-fold increased risk.Studies varied by measures, reference groups, and adjustment for confounders, which could bias combined estimates. Effects of multiple risk factors were not considered.Extremely dense breasts and first-degree relatives with breast cancer were each associated with at least a 2-fold increase in risk for breast cancer in women aged 40 to 49 years. Identification of these risk factors may be useful for personalized mammography screening.National Cancer Institute.

Project description:Background Risk-based screening in women 40-49 years old has not been evaluated in routine screening mammography practice. Purpose To use a cross-sectional study design to compare the trade-offs of risk-based and age-based screening for women 45 years of age or older to determine short-term outcomes. Materials and Methods A retrospective cross-sectional study was performed by using a database of 20 539 prospectively interpreted consecutive digital screening mammograms in 10 280 average-risk women aged 40-49 years who were screened at an academic medical center between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2013. Two hypothetical screening scenarios were compared: an age-based (≥45 years) scenario versus a risk-based (a 5-year risk of breast cancer greater than that of an average 50-year-old) scenario. Risk factors for risk-based screening included family history, race, age, prior breast biopsy, and breast density. Outcomes included breast cancers detected at mammography, false-positive mammograms, and benign biopsy findings. Short-term outcomes were compared by using the χ2 test. Results The screening population included 71 148 screening mammograms in 24 928 women with a mean age of 55.5 years ± 8.9 (standard deviation) (age range, 40-74 years). In women 40-49 years old, usual care included 50 screening-detected cancers, 1787 false-positive mammograms, and 384 benign biopsy results. The age-based (≥45 years) screening strategy revealed more cancers than did the risk-based strategy (34 [68%] vs 13 [26%] of 50; P < .001), while prompting more false-positive mammograms (899 [50.3%] vs 216 [12.1%] of 1787; P < .001) and benign biopsy results (175 [45.6%] vs 49 [12.8%] of 384; P < .001). The risk-based strategy demonstrated low levels of eligibility (few screenings) in the 40-44-year age group. Differences in outcomes in the 45-49-year age group explained the overall hypothetical screening strategy differences. Conclusion Risk-based screening for women 40-49 years old includes few women in the 40-44-year age range. Significant trade-offs in the 45-49-year age group explain the overall difference between hypothetical screening scenarios, both of which reduce the benefits as well as the harms of mammography for women 40-49 years old. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Joe and Hayward in this issue.

Project description:To develop models of compressed breasts undergoing mammography based on objective analysis, that are capable of accurately representing breast shapes in acquired clinical images and generating new, clinically realistic shapes.An automated edge detection algorithm was used to catalogue the breast shapes of clinically acquired cranio-caudal (CC) and medio-lateral oblique (MLO) view mammograms from a large database of digital mammography images. Principal component analysis (PCA) was performed on these shapes to reduce the information contained within the shapes to a small number of linearly independent variables. The breast shape models, one of each view, were developed from the identified principal components, and their ability to reproduce the shape of breasts from an independent set of mammograms not used in the PCA, was assessed both visually and quantitatively by calculating the average distance error (ADE).The PCA breast shape models of the CC and MLO mammographic views based on six principal components, in which 99.2% and 98.0%, respectively, of the total variance of the dataset is contained, were found to be able to reproduce breast shapes with strong fidelity (CC view mean ADE = 0.90 mm, MLO view mean ADE = 1.43 mm) and to generate new clinically realistic shapes. The PCA models based on fewer principal components were also successful, but to a lesser degree, as the two-component model exhibited a mean ADE = 2.99 mm for the CC view, and a mean ADE = 4.63 mm for the MLO view. The four-component models exhibited a mean ADE = 1.47 mm for the CC view and a mean ADE = 2.14 mm for the MLO view. Paired t-tests of the ADE values of each image between models showed that these differences were statistically significant (max p-value = 0.0247). Visual examination of modeled breast shapes confirmed these results. Histograms of the PCA parameters associated with the six principal components were fitted with Gaussian distributions. The six-component model was also used to generate CC and MLO view mammogram breast shapes, using the mean PCA parameter values of these distributions and randomly generated values based on the fitted Gaussian distributions, which resemble clinically encountered breasts. A spreadsheet with the data necessary to apply this model is provided as the supplementary material.Our PCA models of breast shapes in both mammographic views successfully reproduce analyzed breast shapes and generate new clinically relevant shapes. This work can aid in research applications which incorporate breast shape modeling, such as x-ray scatter correction, dosimetry, and image registration.

Project description:Importance:Whole-breast ultrasonography has been advocated to supplement screening mammography to improve outcomes in women with dense breasts. Objective:To determine the performance of screening mammography plus screening ultrasonography compared with screening mammography alone in community practice. Design, Setting, and Participants:Observational cohort study. Two Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium registries provided prospectively collected data on screening mammography with vs without same-day breast ultrasonography from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2013. The dates of analysis were March 2014 to December 2018. A total of 6081 screening mammography plus same-day screening ultrasonography examinations in 3386 women were propensity score matched 1:5 to 30 062 screening mammograms without screening ultrasonography in 15 176 women from a sample of 113 293 mammograms. Exclusion criteria included a personal history of breast cancer and self-reported breast symptoms. Exposures:Screening mammography with vs without screening ultrasonography. Main Outcomes and Measures:Cancer detection rate and rates of interval cancer, false-positive biopsy recommendation, short-interval follow-up, and positive predictive value of biopsy recommendation were estimated and compared using log binomial regression. Results:Screening mammography with vs without ultrasonography examinations was performed more often in women with dense breasts (74.3% [n = 4317 of 5810] vs 35.9% [n = 39 928 of 111 306] in the overall sample), in women who were younger than 50 years (49.7% [n = 3022 of 6081] vs 31.7% [n = 16 897 of 112 462]), and in women with a family history of breast cancer (42.9% [n = 2595 of 6055] vs 15.0% [n = 16 897 of 112 462]). While 21.4% (n = 1154 of 5392) of screening ultrasonography examinations were performed in women with high or very high (≥2.50%) Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium 5-year risk scores, 53.6% (n = 2889 of 5392) had low or average (<1.67%) risk. Comparing mammography plus ultrasonography with mammography alone, the cancer detection rate was similar at 5.4 vs 5.5 per 1000 screens (adjusted relative risk [RR], 1.14; 95% CI, 0.76-1.68), as were interval cancer rates at 1.5 vs 1.9 per 1000 screens (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.33-1.37). The false-positive biopsy rates were significantly higher at 52.0 vs 22.2 per 1000 screens (RR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.93-2.58), as was short-interval follow-up at 3.9% vs 1.1% (RR, 3.10; 95% CI, 2.60-3.70). The positive predictive value of biopsy recommendation was significantly lower at 9.5% vs 21.4% (RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.35-0.71). Conclusions and Relevance:In a relatively young population of women at low, intermediate, and high breast cancer risk, these results suggest that the benefits of supplemental ultrasonography screening may not outweigh associated harms.

Dataset Information

Evaluation of Adjunctive Ultrasonography for Breast Cancer Detection Among Women Aged 40-49 Years With Varying Breast Density Undergoing Screening Mammography: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure