The psychological impact and experience of breast cancer screening in young women with an increased risk of breast cancer due to neurofibromatosis type 1

Clinical and imaging modality factors impacting radiological interpretation of breast screening in young women with neurofibromatosis type 1

Young women with Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) have a high risk of developing breast cancer and poorer survival following breast cancer diagnosis. International guidelines recommend commencing breast screening between 30 and 35 years; however, the optimal screening modality is unestablished, and previous reports suggest that breast imaging may be complicated by the presence of intramammary and cutaneous neurofibromas (cNFs). The aim of this study was to explore potential barriers to implementation of breast screening for young women with NF1.Twenty-seven women (30-47 years) with NF1 completed breast screening with breast MRI, mammogram and breast ultrasound. Nineteen probably benign/suspicious lesions were detected across 14 women. Despite the presence of breast cNFs, initial biopsy rate for participants with NF1 (37%), were comparable to a BRCA pathogenic variant (PV) cohort (25%) (P = 0.311). No cancers or intramammary neurofibromas were identified. Most participants (89%) returned for second round screening.The presence of cNF did not affect clinician confidence in 3D mammogram interpretation, although increasing breast density, frequently seen in young women, impeded confidence for 2D and 3D mammogram. Moderate or marked background parenchymal enhancement on MRI was higher in the NF1 cohort (70.4%) than BRCA PV carriers (47.3%), which is an independent risk factor for breast cancer.Breast MRI was the preferred mode of screening over mammogram, as the majority (85%) with NF1 demonstrated breast density (BI-RADS 3C/4D), which hinders mammogram interpretation. For those with high breast density and high cNF breast coverage, 3D rather than 2D mammogram is preferred, if MRI is unavailable.

Effects of a 360° virtual counselling environment on patient anxiety and CCTA process time: A randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

This study investigated whether a 360° virtual counselling environment (360°VCE) was more effective at decreasing patients' anxiety than routine standard of care counselling for patients undergoing coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), and if there was any difference in the process times for both of these groups.

METHODS

A total of 86 patients underwent CCTA in this randomised controlled trial. Patients were randomly assigned to intervention and control groups. The 360°VCE was developed using spherical panoramic images and non-immersive 360° technology. The primary outcome, anxiety, was measured using the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). The secondary outcome, CCTA process time, was measured from the time of arrival in the department until end of examination.

RESULTS

Pre-scan anxiety was lower among patients in the 360°VCE group immediately before CCTA in comparison to patients in the control group (p = 0.015). Women demonstrated higher levels of anxiety than men in both groups. No between-group differences were discerned in CCTA process time.

CONCLUSION

Access to 360°VCE can reduce patients' pre-CCTA anxiety levels.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The presented results can be used to improve patient counselling and care, reduce anxiety among patients undergoing CCTA, and optimise the CCTA examination procedure.

Breast Cancer Screening Utilization and Outcomes in Women With Neurofibromatosis Type 1

INTRODUCTION

Women with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) have up to a 5-fold increased risk for breast cancer before age 50 and a 3.5-fold increased risk of breast cancer overall. The purpose of our study was to assess breast cancer screening utilization and outcomes in this population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This IRB approved HIPAA compliant study retrospectively assessed consecutive NF1 patients (January 2012-December 2021) with recorded clinical visits and/or breast imaging. Patient demographics, risk factors, and screening mammogram and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) outcomes were recorded. Descriptive statistics were obtained and standard breast screening measures were calculated.

RESULTS

One hundred and eleven women (median age 43, range 30-82) were eligible for screening based on current NCCN guidelines. A total of 86% (95/111) of all patients and 80% (24/30) of patients under age 40 had at least 1 mammogram. In contrast, 28% (31/111) of all patients and 33% (25/76) of patients ages 30 to 50 had at least 1 screening MRI. Of 368 screening mammograms performed, 38 of 368 (10%) resulted in the recall, and 22 of 368 (6%) resulted in a biopsy. Of 48 screening MRIs performed, 19 of 48 (40%) short-term follow-ups and 12 of 48 (25%) biopsies were recommended. All 6 screen-detected cancers in our cohort were detected initially on screening mammograms.

CONCLUSION

Results confirm the utility and performance of screening mammography in the NF1 population. The low utilization of MRI in our cohort limits the evaluation of outcomes via this modality and suggests there may be an education or interest gap among referrers and patients regarding supplemental screening recommendations.