1
|
Omeranovic A, Lapointe J, Fortier P, Bergeron AS, Dorval M, Chiquette J, Boubaker A, Eloy L, Turgeon A, Lambert-Côté L, Joly Y, Brooks JD, Walker MJ, Stockley T, Pashayan N, Antoniou A, Easton D, Chiarelli AM, Knoppers B, Simard J, Nabi H. Primary care providers' experience and satisfaction with personalised breast cancer screening risk communication: a descriptive cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 2025; 15:e093936. [PMID: 40316347 PMCID: PMC12049900 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-093936] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/19/2024] [Accepted: 04/11/2025] [Indexed: 05/04/2025] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To describe primary care providers' (PCPs) experience and satisfaction with receiving risk communication documents on their patient's breast cancer (BC) risk assessment and proposed screening action plan. DESIGN Descriptive cross-sectional study. SETTING A survey was distributed to all 763 PCPs linked to 1642 women participating in the Personalized Risk Assessment for Prevention and Early Detection of Breast Cancer: Integration and Implementation (PERSPECTIVE I&I) research project in Quebec, approximately 1-4 months after the delivery of the risk communication documents. The recruitment phase took place from July 2021 to July 2022. PARTICIPANTS PCPs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Descriptive analyses were conducted to report participants' experiences and satisfaction with receiving risk communication. Responses to two open-ended questions were subjected to content analysis. RESULTS A total of 168 PCPs answered the survey, from which 73% reported being women and 74% having more than 15 years of practice. Only 38% were familiar with the risk-based BC screening approach prior to receiving their patient risk category. A majority (86%) agreed with the screening approach and would recommend it to their patients if implemented at the population level. A majority of PCPs also reported understanding the information provided (92%) and expressed agreement with the proposed BC screening action plan (89%). Some PCPs recommended simplifying the materials, acknowledging the potential increase in workload and emphasising the need for careful planning of professional training efforts. CONCLUSION PCPs expressed positive attitudes towards a risk-based BC screening approach and were generally satisfied with the information provided. This study suggests that, if introduced in Canada in a manner similar to the PERSPECTIVE I&I project, risk-based BC screening would likely be supported by most PCPs. However, they emphasised the importance of addressing concerns such as professional training and the potential impact on workload if the approach were to be implemented at the population level. Future qualitative studies are needed to further explore the training needs of PCPs and to develop strategies for integrating this approach with the high workloads faced by PCPs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arian Omeranovic
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, Hopital du Saint-Sacrement, Québec, Québec, Canada
| | - Julie Lapointe
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, Hopital du Saint-Sacrement, Québec, Québec, Canada
| | - Philippe Fortier
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, Hopital du Saint-Sacrement, Québec, Québec, Canada
| | - Anne-Sophie Bergeron
- Département des Sciences Infirmières, Université du Québec à Rimouski-Campus de Lévis, Lévis, Québec, Canada
- Research Centre of the Chaudière-Appalaches Integrated Health and Social Services Centre, Lévis, Québec, Canada
| | - Michel Dorval
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, Hopital du Saint-Sacrement, Québec, Québec, Canada
- Research Centre of the Chaudière-Appalaches Integrated Health and Social Services Centre, Lévis, Québec, Canada
| | - Jocelyne Chiquette
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, Hopital du Saint-Sacrement, Québec, Québec, Canada
| | - Asma Boubaker
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, Hopital du Saint-Sacrement, Québec, Québec, Canada
| | - Laurence Eloy
- Programme québécois de cancérologie, Ministère de la Santé et des Services Sociaux du Québec, Québec, Québec, Canada
| | - Annie Turgeon
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, Hopital du Saint-Sacrement, Québec, Québec, Canada
| | - Laurence Lambert-Côté
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, Hopital du Saint-Sacrement, Québec, Québec, Canada
| | - Yann Joly
- Center of Genomics and Policy, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada
- Human Genetics Department and Bioethics Unit, McGill University Faculty of Medicine, Montreal, Québec, Canada
| | - Jennifer D Brooks
- University of Toronto Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Meghan J Walker
- University of Toronto Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Ontario Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Tracy Stockley
- Laboratory Medicine Program, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Nora Pashayan
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Antonis Antoniou
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Douglas Easton
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Anna Maria Chiarelli
- University of Toronto Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Ontario Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Bartha Knoppers
- Center of Genomics and Policy, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada
| | - Jacques Simard
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, Hopital du Saint-Sacrement, Québec, Québec, Canada
- Department of Molecular Medicine, Laval University Faculty of Medicine, Québec, Québec, Canada
| | - Hermann Nabi
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, Hopital du Saint-Sacrement, Québec, Québec, Canada
- Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Laval University Faculty of Medicine, Québec, Québec, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Caumo F, Gennaro G, Ravaioli A, Baldan E, Bezzon E, Bottin S, Carlevaris P, Ciampani L, Coran A, Dal Bosco C, Del Genio S, Dalla Pietà A, Falcini F, Maggetto F, Manco G, Masiero T, Petrioli M, Polico I, Pisapia T, Zemella M, Zorzi M, Zovato S, Bucchi L. Personalized screening based on risk and density: prevalence data from the RIBBS study. LA RADIOLOGIA MEDICA 2025; 130:740-752. [PMID: 40117106 DOI: 10.1007/s11547-025-01981-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2024] [Accepted: 02/21/2025] [Indexed: 03/23/2025]
Abstract
PURPOSE To present the prevalence screening results of the RIsk-Based Breast Screening (RIBBS) study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05675085), a quasi-experimental population-based study evaluating a personalized screening model for women aged 45-49. This model uses digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and stratifies participants by risk and breast density, incorporating tailored screening intervals with or without supplemental imaging (ultrasound, US, and breast MRI), with the goal of reducing advanced breast cancer (BC) incidence compared to annual digital mammography (DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS An interventional cohort of 10,269 women aged 45 was enrolled (January 2020-December 2021. Participants underwent DBT and completed a BC risk questionnaire. Volumetric breast density and lifetime risk were used to assign five subgroups to tailored screening regimens: low-risk low-density (LR-LD), low-risk high-density (LR-HD), intermediate-risk low-density (IR-LD), intermediate-risk high-density (IR-HD), and high-risk (HR). Screening performance was compared with an observational control cohort of 43,838 women undergoing annual DM. RESULTS Compared to LR-LD, intermediate-risk groups showed a 4.9- (IR-LD) and 4.6-fold (IR-HD) higher prevalence of BC, driven by a 7.1- and 7.1-fold higher prevalence of pT1c tumors. The interventional cohort had lower recall rate (rate ratio, 0.5), higher surgery rate (1.9) and increased prevalence of DCIS (2.9), pT1c (2.3) and grade 3 tumors (2.4), compared to controls. CONCLUSION The prevalence screening demonstrated the feasibility of using DBT and -in high-density subgroups- supplemental US. The stratification criteria effectively identified subpopulations with different BC prevalence. Increasing the detection rate of pT1c tumors is not sufficient but necessary to achieve a reduction in advanced BC incidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesca Caumo
- Breast Radiology Unit, Department of Imaging and Radiotherapy, Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV) IRCCS, Via Gattamelata 64, 35128, Padua, Italy
| | - Gisella Gennaro
- Breast Radiology Unit, Department of Imaging and Radiotherapy, Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV) IRCCS, Via Gattamelata 64, 35128, Padua, Italy.
| | - Alessandra Ravaioli
- Emilia‑Romagna Cancer Registry, Romagna Cancer Institute IRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori (IRST) Dino Amadori, Meldola, Forlì, Italy
| | - Enrica Baldan
- Breast Radiology Unit, Department of Imaging and Radiotherapy, Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV) IRCCS, Via Gattamelata 64, 35128, Padua, Italy
| | - Elisabetta Bezzon
- Breast Radiology Unit, Department of Imaging and Radiotherapy, Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV) IRCCS, Via Gattamelata 64, 35128, Padua, Italy
| | - Silvia Bottin
- Breast Radiology Unit, Department of Imaging and Radiotherapy, Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV) IRCCS, Via Gattamelata 64, 35128, Padua, Italy
| | - Paolo Carlevaris
- Breast Radiology Unit, Department of Imaging and Radiotherapy, Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV) IRCCS, Via Gattamelata 64, 35128, Padua, Italy
| | - Lina Ciampani
- Breast Radiology Unit, Department of Imaging and Radiotherapy, Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV) IRCCS, Via Gattamelata 64, 35128, Padua, Italy
| | - Alessandro Coran
- Breast Radiology Unit, Department of Imaging and Radiotherapy, Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV) IRCCS, Via Gattamelata 64, 35128, Padua, Italy
| | - Chiara Dal Bosco
- Breast Radiology Unit, Department of Imaging and Radiotherapy, Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV) IRCCS, Via Gattamelata 64, 35128, Padua, Italy
| | - Sara Del Genio
- Breast Radiology Unit, Department of Imaging and Radiotherapy, Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV) IRCCS, Via Gattamelata 64, 35128, Padua, Italy
| | - Alessia Dalla Pietà
- Breast Radiology Unit, Department of Imaging and Radiotherapy, Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV) IRCCS, Via Gattamelata 64, 35128, Padua, Italy
| | - Fabio Falcini
- Emilia‑Romagna Cancer Registry, Romagna Cancer Institute IRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori (IRST) Dino Amadori, Meldola, Forlì, Italy
- Cancer Prevention Unit, Local Health Authority, Forlì, Italy
| | - Federico Maggetto
- Breast Radiology Unit, Department of Imaging and Radiotherapy, Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV) IRCCS, Via Gattamelata 64, 35128, Padua, Italy
| | | | - Tiziana Masiero
- Breast Radiology Unit, Department of Imaging and Radiotherapy, Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV) IRCCS, Via Gattamelata 64, 35128, Padua, Italy
| | - Maria Petrioli
- Breast Radiology Unit, Department of Imaging and Radiotherapy, Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV) IRCCS, Via Gattamelata 64, 35128, Padua, Italy
| | - Ilaria Polico
- Breast Radiology Unit, Department of Imaging and Radiotherapy, Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV) IRCCS, Via Gattamelata 64, 35128, Padua, Italy
| | - Tiziana Pisapia
- Breast Radiology Unit, Department of Imaging and Radiotherapy, Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV) IRCCS, Via Gattamelata 64, 35128, Padua, Italy
| | - Martina Zemella
- Breast Radiology Unit, Department of Imaging and Radiotherapy, Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV) IRCCS, Via Gattamelata 64, 35128, Padua, Italy
| | - Manuel Zorzi
- SER - Servizio Epidemiologico Regionale e Registri Azienda Zero, Padua, Italy
| | - Stefania Zovato
- Hereditary Tumors Unit, Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV) IRCCS, Padua, Italy
| | - Lauro Bucchi
- Emilia‑Romagna Cancer Registry, Romagna Cancer Institute IRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori (IRST) Dino Amadori, Meldola, Forlì, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Wang Y, Ho PJ, Mou L, Li J. Women's preferences for testing to predict breast cancer risk - a discrete choice experiment. J Transl Med 2025; 23:96. [PMID: 39838430 PMCID: PMC11753052 DOI: 10.1186/s12967-025-06119-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/16/2024] [Accepted: 01/08/2025] [Indexed: 01/23/2025] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Risk-based breast cancer screening offers a more targeted and potentially cost-effective approach in cancer detection compared to age-based screening. This study aims to understand women's preferences and willingness for undergoing risk assessment tests. METHODS A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted. Six attributes were selected to construct the DCE questionnaire: one-time cost of the test, methods for reducing late-stage breast cancer, annual breast cancer screening expenses, insurance coverage for early-stage breast cancer, family risk correlation, and risk communication methods. Women aged between 21 and 59 were recruited from Singapore. Latent class analysis was performed. RESULTS Three hundred twenty-eight women were included in the analysis and classified into two classes: test supporters and non-supporters. Both classes prioritised test costs and screening costs. Among non-cost attributes, the potential to reduce late-stage breast cancer diagnosis was the most influential factor. Insurance coverage increased willingness to undergo testing. Risk communication methods were not significant in influencing the decision of undergoing tests. Non-supporters were less inclined to take the test if family risk correlation was high. Younger women, married women, full-time employees, and those with a history of breast disease were more likely to be supporters. Women with a family history of breast cancer were more likely to be non-supporters. CONCLUSIONS Financial incentives play a notable role in increasing the uptake of risk-prediction tests. However, the programme's success depends on understanding and addressing the diverse preferences of women. While cost considerations ranked highly, additional strategies are needed to engage groups that are hesitant, particularly those with a high family risk correlation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yi Wang
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore, 117549, Republic of Singapore.
| | - Peh Joo Ho
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore, 117549, Republic of Singapore
- Genome Institute of Singapore (GIS), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore, 138672, Republic of Singapore
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore, 119228, Republic of Singapore
| | - Langming Mou
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore, 117549, Republic of Singapore
| | - Jingmei Li
- Genome Institute of Singapore (GIS), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore, 138672, Republic of Singapore
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore, 119228, Republic of Singapore
- National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, 168583, Republic of Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Harindi Alawattegama L, Gaddah M, Kimani L, Antoniou GA. The effect of diabetes on abdominal aortic aneurysm growth - updated systematic review and meta-analysis. VASA 2024; 53:397-410. [PMID: 39206613 DOI: 10.1024/0301-1526/a001143] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/04/2024]
Abstract
Studies have shown that diabetes mellitus is associated with a reduced prevalence and growth of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). Establishing the factors that influence AAA growth will enable us to risk stratify patients and potentially optimise management. We aimed to provide an updated systematic review and meta-analysis that would inform more targeted screening practices based on patient demographics. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and DARE were searched using the Ovid interface and PubMed search engine. Studies were deemed eligible if they compared the growth rate of AAA between diabetic and non-diabetic populations. The mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence internal (CI) was used for data synthesis. Twenty-four studies from 20 articles with a total of 10,121 participants were included in our meta-analysis. An overall negative effect was shown between AAA growth and diabetes, with an annual mean effect of -0.25 mm/year (95% CI -0.35, -0.15; I2 = 73%). Our meta-analysis, which is larger and scientifically more robust compared to previous analyses, has confirmed that diabetes reduces the growth of AAA by approximately 0.25 mm a year compared to non-diabetic populations. This could have significant implications for AAA screening practices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lakna Harindi Alawattegama
- Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Mariam Gaddah
- Department of General Surgery, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Linda Kimani
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
- Division of Cardiovascular Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - George A Antoniou
- Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
- Division of Cardiovascular Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Bartolomé-Moreno C, Melús-Palazón E, Vela-Vallespín C, Arana-Ballestar S, Gallego M, Navarro J, Bellas-Beceiro B. [Cancer prevention recommendations: Update 2024]. Aten Primaria 2024; 56 Suppl 1:103128. [PMID: 39613364 PMCID: PMC11705588 DOI: 10.1016/j.aprim.2024.103128] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2024] [Revised: 07/18/2024] [Accepted: 07/29/2024] [Indexed: 12/01/2024] Open
Abstract
Cancer is one of the main causes of morbidity and mortality. Environmental factors along with lifestyle: tobacco and alcohol consumption, unhealthy diet and sedentary lifestyle and lack of physical activity, are some of the risk factors that have caused an increase in cancer. This article updates the evidence and recommendations for cancer prevention strategies through screening in asymptomatic patients, as well as early detection of signs and symptoms in medium-risk and high-risk populations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cruz Bartolomé-Moreno
- Centro de Salud Parque Goya de Zaragoza; Unidad Docente de Atención Familiar y Comunitaria Sector Zaragoza I, Servicio Aragonés de Salud, Zaragoza, España.
| | - Elena Melús-Palazón
- Centro de Salud Actur Oeste de Zaragoza; Unidad Docente de Atención Familiar y Comunitaria Sector Zaragoza I, Servicio Aragonés de Salud, Zaragoza, España
| | - Carmen Vela-Vallespín
- ABS Riu Nord i Riu Sud, Institut Català de la Salut, Santa Coloma de Gramenet, Barcelona, España
| | - Santi Arana-Ballestar
- Centro de Salud Parque Goya de Zaragoza; Unidad Docente de Atención Familiar y Comunitaria Sector Zaragoza I, Servicio Aragonés de Salud, Zaragoza, España
| | - Marta Gallego
- Centro de Salud Parque Goya de Zaragoza; Unidad Docente de Atención Familiar y Comunitaria Sector Zaragoza I, Servicio Aragonés de Salud, Zaragoza, España
| | - Jorge Navarro
- Centro de Salud Parque Goya de Zaragoza; Unidad Docente de Atención Familiar y Comunitaria Sector Zaragoza I, Servicio Aragonés de Salud, Zaragoza, España
| | - Begoña Bellas-Beceiro
- Unidad Docente de Atención Familiar y Comunitaria La Laguna-Tenerife Norte, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Canarias, La Laguna, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, España
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Gennaro G, Bucchi L, Ravaioli A, Zorzi M, Falcini F, Russo F, Caumo F. The risk-based breast screening (RIBBS) study protocol: a personalized screening model for young women. LA RADIOLOGIA MEDICA 2024; 129:727-736. [PMID: 38512619 PMCID: PMC11088554 DOI: 10.1007/s11547-024-01797-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2023] [Accepted: 02/02/2024] [Indexed: 03/23/2024]
Abstract
The optimal mammography screening strategy for women aged 45-49 years is a matter of debate. We present the RIBBS study protocol, a quasi-experimental, prospective, population-based study comparing a risk- and breast density-stratified screening model (interventional cohort) with annual digital mammography (DM) screening (observational control cohort) in a real-world setting. The interventional cohort consists of 10,269 women aged 45 years enrolled between 2020 and 2021 from two provinces of the Veneto Region (northen Italy). At baseline, participants underwent two-view digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and completed the Tyrer-Cuzick risk prediction model. Volumetric breast density (VBD) was calculated from DBT and the lifetime risk (LTR) was estimated by including VBD among the risk factors. Based on VBD and LTR, women were classified into five subgroups with specific screening protocols for subsequent screening rounds: (1) LTR ≤ 17% and nondense breast: biennial DBT; (2) LTR ≤ 17% and dense breast: biennial DBT and ultrasound; (3) LTR 17-30% or LTR > 30% without family history of BC, and nondense breast: annual DBT; (4) LTR 17-30% or > 30% without family history of BC, and dense breast: annual DBT and ultrasound; and (5) LTR > 30% and family history of BC: annual DBT and breast MRI. The interventional cohort is still ongoing. An observational, nonequivalent control cohort of 43,000 women aged 45 years participating in an annual DM screening programme was recruited in three provinces of the neighbouring Emilia-Romagna Region. Cumulative incidence rates of advanced BC at three, five, and ten years between the two cohorts will be compared, adjusting for the incidence difference at baseline.Trial registration This study is registered on Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05675085).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Lauro Bucchi
- Emilia-Romagna Cancer Registry, Romagna Cancer Institute, IRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori (IRST) Dino Amadori, Meldola, Forlì, Italy.
| | - Alessandra Ravaioli
- Emilia-Romagna Cancer Registry, Romagna Cancer Institute, IRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori (IRST) Dino Amadori, Meldola, Forlì, Italy
| | - Manuel Zorzi
- SER - Servizio Epidemiologico Regionale e Registri, Azienda Zero, Padua, Italy
| | - Fabio Falcini
- Emilia-Romagna Cancer Registry, Romagna Cancer Institute, IRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori (IRST) Dino Amadori, Meldola, Forlì, Italy
- Cancer Prevention Unit, Local Health Authority, Forlì, Italy
| | - Francesca Russo
- Direzione Prevenzione, Sicurezza Alimentare, Veterinaria, Regione del Veneto, Venice, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Migowski A, Nadanovsky P, Manso de Mello Vianna C. Harms and benefits of mammographic screening for breast cancer in Brazil. PLoS One 2024; 19:e0297048. [PMID: 38271392 PMCID: PMC10810469 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0297048] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2023] [Accepted: 12/26/2023] [Indexed: 01/27/2024] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION In the absence of evidence on the effect of mammographic screening on overall mortality, comparing the number of deaths avoided with the number of deaths caused by screening would be ideal, but the only existing models of this type adopt a very narrow definition of harms. The objective of the present study was to estimate the number of deaths prevented and induced by various mammography screening protocols in Brazil. METHODS A simulation study of cohorts of Brazilian women screened, considering various age groups and screening interval protocols, was performed based on life tables. The number of deaths avoided and caused by screening was estimated, as was the absolute risk reduction, the number needed to invite for screening-NNS, the net benefit of screening, and the ratio of "lives saved" to "lives lost". Nine possible combinations of balances between benefits and harms were performed for each protocol, in addition to other sensitivity analyses. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS The most efficient protocol was biennial screening from 60 to 69 years of age, with almost three times more deaths avoided than biennial screening from 50 to 59 years of age, with a similar number of deaths avoided by biennial screening from 50 to 69 years of age and with the greatest net benefit. Compared with the best scenario of annual screening from 40 to 49 years of age, the NNS of the protocol with biennial screening from 60 to 69 years of age was three-fold lower. Even in its best scenario, the addition of annual screening from 40 to 49 years of age to biennial screening from 50 to 69 years of age results in a decreased net benefit. However, even in the 50-69 year age group, the estimated reduction in breast cancer mortality for Brazil was half that estimated for the United Kingdom.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arn Migowski
- Professional Master’s Program in Health Technology Assessment, Teaching and Research Coordination, Instituto Nacional de Cardiologia (INC), Ministry of Health, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
- Division of Clinical Research and Technological Development, Research and Innovation Coordination, National Cancer Institute (INCA), Ministry of Health, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
| | - Paulo Nadanovsky
- Instituto de Medicina Social (IMS), Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
- Escola Nacional de Saúde Pública (ENSP), FIOCRUZ, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
| | - Cid Manso de Mello Vianna
- Instituto de Medicina Social (IMS), Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Levi H, Carmi S, Rosset S, Yerushalmi R, Zick A, Yablonski-Peretz T, Wang Q, Bolla MK, Dennis J, Michailidou K, Lush M, Ahearn T, Andrulis IL, Anton-Culver H, Antoniou AC, Arndt V, Augustinsson A, Auvinen P, Beane Freeman L, Beckmann M, Behrens S, Bermisheva M, Bodelon C, Bogdanova NV, Bojesen SE, Brenner H, Byers H, Camp N, Castelao J, Chang-Claude J, Chirlaque MD, Chung W, Clarke C, Collee MJ, Colonna S, Couch F, Cox A, Cross SS, Czene K, Daly M, Devilee P, Dork T, Dossus L, Eccles DM, Eliassen AH, Eriksson M, Evans G, Fasching P, Fletcher O, Flyger H, Fritschi L, Gabrielson M, Gago-Dominguez M, García-Closas M, Garcia-Saenz JA, Genkinger J, Giles GG, Goldberg M, Guénel P, Hall P, Hamann U, He W, Hillemanns P, Hollestelle A, Hoppe R, Hopper J, Jakovchevska S, Jakubowska A, Jernström H, John E, Johnson N, Jones M, Vijai J, Kaaks R, Khusnutdinova E, Kitahara C, Koutros S, Kristensen V, Kurian AW, Lacey J, Lambrechts D, Le Marchand L, Lejbkowicz F, Lindblom A, Loibl S, Lori A, Lubinski J, Mannermaa A, Manoochehri M, Mavroudis D, Menon U, Mulligan A, Murphy R, Nevelsteen I, Newman WG, Obi N, O'Brien K, Offit K, Olshan A, Plaseska-Karanfilska D, et alLevi H, Carmi S, Rosset S, Yerushalmi R, Zick A, Yablonski-Peretz T, Wang Q, Bolla MK, Dennis J, Michailidou K, Lush M, Ahearn T, Andrulis IL, Anton-Culver H, Antoniou AC, Arndt V, Augustinsson A, Auvinen P, Beane Freeman L, Beckmann M, Behrens S, Bermisheva M, Bodelon C, Bogdanova NV, Bojesen SE, Brenner H, Byers H, Camp N, Castelao J, Chang-Claude J, Chirlaque MD, Chung W, Clarke C, Collee MJ, Colonna S, Couch F, Cox A, Cross SS, Czene K, Daly M, Devilee P, Dork T, Dossus L, Eccles DM, Eliassen AH, Eriksson M, Evans G, Fasching P, Fletcher O, Flyger H, Fritschi L, Gabrielson M, Gago-Dominguez M, García-Closas M, Garcia-Saenz JA, Genkinger J, Giles GG, Goldberg M, Guénel P, Hall P, Hamann U, He W, Hillemanns P, Hollestelle A, Hoppe R, Hopper J, Jakovchevska S, Jakubowska A, Jernström H, John E, Johnson N, Jones M, Vijai J, Kaaks R, Khusnutdinova E, Kitahara C, Koutros S, Kristensen V, Kurian AW, Lacey J, Lambrechts D, Le Marchand L, Lejbkowicz F, Lindblom A, Loibl S, Lori A, Lubinski J, Mannermaa A, Manoochehri M, Mavroudis D, Menon U, Mulligan A, Murphy R, Nevelsteen I, Newman WG, Obi N, O'Brien K, Offit K, Olshan A, Plaseska-Karanfilska D, Olson J, Panico S, Park-Simon TW, Patel A, Peterlongo P, Rack B, Radice P, Rennert G, Rhenius V, Romero A, Saloustros E, Sandler D, Schmidt MK, Schwentner L, Shah M, Sharma P, Simard J, Southey M, Stone J, Tapper WJ, Taylor J, Teras L, Toland AE, Troester M, Truong T, van der Kolk LE, Weinberg C, Wendt C, Yang XR, Zheng W, Ziogas A, Dunning AM, Pharoah P, Easton DF, Ben-Sachar S, Elefant N, Shamir R, Elkon R. Evaluation of European-based polygenic risk score for breast cancer in Ashkenazi Jewish women in Israel. J Med Genet 2023; 60:1186-1197. [PMID: 37451831 PMCID: PMC10715538 DOI: 10.1136/jmg-2023-109185] [Show More Authors] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2023] [Accepted: 05/28/2023] [Indexed: 07/18/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Polygenic risk score (PRS), calculated based on genome-wide association studies (GWASs), can improve breast cancer (BC) risk assessment. To date, most BC GWASs have been performed in individuals of European (EUR) ancestry, and the generalisation of EUR-based PRS to other populations is a major challenge. In this study, we examined the performance of EUR-based BC PRS models in Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) women. METHODS We generated PRSs based on data on EUR women from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC). We tested the performance of the PRSs in a cohort of 2161 AJ women from Israel (1437 cases and 724 controls) from BCAC (BCAC cohort from Israel (BCAC-IL)). In addition, we tested the performance of these EUR-based BC PRSs, as well as the established 313-SNP EUR BC PRS, in an independent cohort of 181 AJ women from Hadassah Medical Center (HMC) in Israel. RESULTS In the BCAC-IL cohort, the highest OR per 1 SD was 1.56 (±0.09). The OR for AJ women at the top 10% of the PRS distribution compared with the middle quintile was 2.10 (±0.24). In the HMC cohort, the OR per 1 SD of the EUR-based PRS that performed best in the BCAC-IL cohort was 1.58±0.27. The OR per 1 SD of the commonly used 313-SNP BC PRS was 1.64 (±0.28). CONCLUSIONS Extant EUR GWAS data can be used for generating PRSs that identify AJ women with markedly elevated risk of BC and therefore hold promise for improving BC risk assessment in AJ women.
Collapse
Grants
- R01 CA176785 NCI NIH HHS
- NU58DP006344 NCCDPHP CDC HHS
- R37 CA070867 NCI NIH HHS
- HHSN261201800015I NCI NIH HHS
- R01 CA064277 NCI NIH HHS
- P50 CA116201 NCI NIH HHS
- G1000143 Medical Research Council
- P30 CA062203 NCI NIH HHS
- R01 CA047305 NCI NIH HHS
- HHSN261201800009I NCI NIH HHS
- R01 CA163353 NCI NIH HHS
- UM1 CA164917 NCI NIH HHS
- U01 CA199277 NCI NIH HHS
- U01 CA179715 NCI NIH HHS
- HHSN261201800032C NCI NIH HHS
- U54 CA156733 NCI NIH HHS
- HHSN261201800009C NCI NIH HHS
- P30 ES010126 NIEHS NIH HHS
- Z01 CP010119 Intramural NIH HHS
- UM1 CA164973 NCI NIH HHS
- P01 CA087969 NCI NIH HHS
- UM1 CA164920 NCI NIH HHS
- NU58DP006320 CDC HHS
- UM1 CA176726 NCI NIH HHS
- R01 CA092447 NCI NIH HHS
- Z01 ES049030 Intramural NIH HHS
- R01 CA058860 NCI NIH HHS
- K07 CA092044 NCI NIH HHS
- HHSN261201800016C NCI NIH HHS
- P50 CA058223 NCI NIH HHS
- R01 CA100374 NCI NIH HHS
- P30 CA008748 NCI NIH HHS
- R01 CA128978 NCI NIH HHS
- R01 CA047147 NCI NIH HHS
- U19 CA148537 NCI NIH HHS
- R01 CA116167 NCI NIH HHS
- R01 CA148667 NCI NIH HHS
- R01 CA063464 NCI NIH HHS
- HHSN261201800016I NCI NIH HHS
- UM1 CA186107 NCI NIH HHS
- P30 CA023100 NCI NIH HHS
- U01 CA063464 NCI NIH HHS
- R01 CA077398 NCI NIH HHS
- R01 CA054281 NCI NIH HHS
- R01 CA132839 NCI NIH HHS
- P30 CA068485 NCI NIH HHS
- U01 CA058860 NCI NIH HHS
- U01 CA164920 NCI NIH HHS
- R35 CA253187 NCI NIH HHS
- 14136 Cancer Research UK
- U19 CA148112 NCI NIH HHS
- HHSN261201800032I NCI NIH HHS
- U01 CA098758 NCI NIH HHS
- Z01 ES044005 Intramural NIH HHS
- U19 CA148065 NCI NIH HHS
- P30 CA033572 NCI NIH HHS
- R01 CA069664 NCI NIH HHS
- Wellcome Trust
- MC_UU_00004/01 Medical Research Council
- HHSN261201800015C NCI NIH HHS
- 001 World Health Organization
- Z01 ES049033 Intramural NIH HHS
- R01 CA192393 NCI NIH HHS
- U01 CA164973 NCI NIH HHS
- R37 CA054281 NCI NIH HHS
- Consellería de Industria Programa Sectorial de Investigación Aplicada
- Statistics Netherlands
- South Eastern Norway Health Authority
- Lower Saxonian Cancer Society
- Lise Boserup Fund
- Heidelberger Zentrum für Personalisierte Onkologie Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum In Der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft
- Lon V. Smith Foundation
- Scottish Funding Council
- Komen Foundation
- Claudia von Schilling Foundation for Breast Cancer Research
- Russian Foundation for Basic Research
- Ligue Contre le Cancer
- Sigrid Juselius Foundation
- Kuopion Yliopistollinen Sairaala
- Sheffield Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre
- Stockholm läns landsting
- Department of Health and Human Services (USA)
- Department of Defence (USA)
- Stichting Tegen Kanker
- David F. and Margaret T. Grohne Family Foundation
- Sundhed og Sygdom, Det Frie Forskningsråd
- Stavros Niarchos Foundation
- Post-Cancer GWAS initiative
- Institute of the Ruhr University Bochum
- Instituto de Salud Carlos III
- Institute of Cancer Research
- Public Health Institute
- Fondation du cancer du sein du Québec
- Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale
- Pink Ribbon
- Institute for Prevention and Occupational Medicine
- K.G. Jebsen Centre for Breast Cancer Research
- Research Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology
- Center of Excellence (Finland)
- Robert and Kate Niehaus Clinical Cancer Genetics Initiative
- Rudolf Bartling Foundation
- Center for Disease Control and Prevention (USA)
- Karolinska Institutet
- Norges Forskningsråd
- Robert Bosch Stiftung
- Intramural Research Funds of the National Cancer Institute (USA)
- Regional Governments of Andalucía, Asturias, Basque Country, Murcia and Navarra, ISCIII RETIC
- Intramural Research Program of the Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics
- Centre International de Recherche sur le Cancer
- Queensland Cancer Fund
- Red Temática de Investigación Cooperativa en Cáncer
- Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health
- National Health Service (UK)
- Ministerie van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport
- National cancer institute (USA)
- KWF Kankerbestrijding
- Märit and Hans Rausings Initiative Against Breast Cancer
- Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro
- Fundación Científica Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer
- ERC advanced grant
- Australian National Health and Medical Research Council
- Agence Nationale de la Recherche
- Dutch Prevention Funds,
- Agence Nationale de Sécurité Sanitaire de l'Alimentation, de l'Environnement et du Travail
- American Cancer Society
- Dutch Zorg Onderzoek
- Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
- Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad (Spain)
- Ministère du Développement Économique, de l’Innovation et de l’Exportation
- Susan G. Komen for the Cure
- Minister of Science and Higher Education
- Medical Research Council UK
- Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation
- Ministry of Science and Higher Education (Sweden)
- Against Breast Cancer
- Mutuelle Générale de l’Education Nationale
- Academy of Finland
- Deutsche Krebshilfe e.V.
- Dietmar-Hopp Foundation,
- Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute
- Deutsche Krebshilfe
- World Cancer Research Fund
- Genome Québec
- National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program
- Breast Cancer Campaign
- National Cancer Research Network
- Berta Kamprad Foundation FBKS
- Bert von Kantzows foundation
- Biomedical Research Centre at Guy’s and St Thomas
- Genome Canada
- Freistaat Sachsen
- Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure
- Friends of Hannover Medical School
- Breast Cancer Research Foundation
- California Department of Public Health
- Government of Russian Federation
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
- National Institute for Health and Care Research
- National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia)
- German Federal Ministry of Research and Education
- National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
- Breast Cancer Now
- Seventh Framework Programme
- Transcan
- Centrum för idrottsforskning
- UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre
- University of Crete
- National Breast Cancer Foundation (Finland)
- European Regional Development Fund
- National Breast Cancer Foundation (Australia)
- United States Army Medical Research and Materiel Command
- EU Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme
- Directorate-General XII, Science, Research, and Development
- Baden Württemberg Ministry of Science, Research and Arts
- VicHealth
- Fondo de Investigación Sanitario
- Victorian Breast Cancer Research Consortium.
- Finnish Cancer Foundation
- University of Southern California San Francisco
- Fomento de la Investigación Clínica Independiente
- the Cancer Biology Research Center (CBRC), Djerassi Oncology Center
- Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
- Cancerfonden
- Tel Aviv University Center for AI and Data Science
- University of Oulu
- National Breast Cancer Foundation (JS)
- Safra Center for Bioinformatics
- Fondation de France, Institut National du Cancer
- Israeli Science Foundation
- University of Utah
- National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund (Japan)
- Chief Scientist Office, Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorate
- Oak Foundation
- Health Research Fund (FIS)
- Ontario Familial Breast Cancer Registry
- New South Wales Cancer Council
- North Carolina University Cancer Research Fund
- Kreftforeningen
- Northern California Breast Cancer Family Registry
- Institut Gustave Roussy
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah
- Ovarian Cancer Research Fund
- NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre
- Hellenic Health Foundation
- Oulun Yliopistollinen Sairaala
- Helmholtz Society
- Herlev and Gentofte Hospital
- PSRSIIRI-701
- Helsinki University Hospital Research Fund
- Cancer Council Victoria
- National Research Council (Italy)
- Cancer Council Tasmania
- Cancer Council Western Australia
- Hamburger Krebsgesellschaft
- Gustav V Jubilee foundation
- National Program of Cancer Registries
- Canadian Cancer Society
- Cancer Council South Australia
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research
- Cancer Council NSW
- Guy's & St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust
- Netherlands Organisation of Scientific Research
- Cancer Institute NSW
- National Institutes of Health (USA)
- National Research Foundation of Korea
- Syöpäsäätiö
- Cancer Foundation of Western Australia
- Netherlands Cancer Registry (NKR),
- Cancer Fund of North Savo
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hagai Levi
- The Blavatnik School of Computer Science, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
- Department of Human Molecular Genetics and Biochemistry, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Shai Carmi
- Braun School of Public Health and Community Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Saharon Rosset
- Department of Statistics and Operations Research, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Rinat Yerushalmi
- Institute of Oncology, Davidoff Cancer Center, Rabin Medical Center, Beilinson Hospital, Petah Tikva, Israel
- Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Aviad Zick
- Department of oncology, Hadassah Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
- Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Tamar Yablonski-Peretz
- Department of oncology, Hadassah Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
- Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Qin Wang
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Manjeet K Bolla
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Joe Dennis
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Kyriaki Michailidou
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Biostatistics Unit, The Cyprus Institute of Neurology & Genetics, Nicosia, Cyprus
| | - Michael Lush
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Thomas Ahearn
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Irene L Andrulis
- Fred A. Litwin Center for Cancer Genetics, Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute of Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Hoda Anton-Culver
- Department of Medicine, Genetic Epidemiology Research Institute, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA
| | - Antonis C Antoniou
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Volker Arndt
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Annelie Augustinsson
- Oncology, Department of Clinical Sciences in Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
| | - Päivi Auvinen
- Translational Cancer Research Area, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, Oncology, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland
- Department of Oncology, Cancer Center, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland
| | - Laura Beane Freeman
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Matthias Beckmann
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Sabine Behrens
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Marina Bermisheva
- Institute of Biochemistry and Genetics, Ufa Federal Research Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Ufa, Russia
| | - Clara Bodelon
- Department of Population Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Natalia V Bogdanova
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
- Gynaecology Research Unit, Hannover Medical School, Hamburg, Germany
- N.N. Alexandrov Research Institute of Oncology and Medical Radiology, Minsk, Belarus
| | - Stig E Bojesen
- Copenhagen General Population Study, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
- Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Hermann Brenner
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) and National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Helen Byers
- North West Genomics Laboratory Hub, Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Nicola Camp
- Department of Internal Medicine and Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt lake city, UT, USA
| | - Jose Castelao
- Oncology and Genetics Unit, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Galicia Sur (IISGS), Xerencia de Xestion Integrada de Vigo-SERGAS, Vigo, Spain
| | - Jenny Chang-Claude
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Cancer Epidemiology Group, University Cancer Center Hamburg (UCCH), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | | | - Wendy Chung
- Departments of Pediatrics and Medicine, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Christine Clarke
- Westmead Institute for Medical Research, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Margriet J Collee
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Sarah Colonna
- Department of Internal Medicine and Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt lake city, UT, USA
| | - Fergus Couch
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Angela Cox
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, Sheffield Institute for Nucleic Acids (SInFoNiA), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Simon S Cross
- Academic Unit of Pathology, Department of Neuroscience, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Kamila Czene
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Mary Daly
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Peter Devilee
- Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
- Department of Human Genetics, Leiden University Medical, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Thilo Dork
- Gynaecology Research Unit, Hannover Medical School, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Laure Dossus
- Nutrition and Metabolism Section, International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC-WHO), Lyon, France
| | - Diana M Eccles
- Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - A Heather Eliassen
- Channing Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
- Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
- Department of Nutrition, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Mikael Eriksson
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Gareth Evans
- North West Genomics Laboratory Hub, Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
- Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Peter Fasching
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Olivia Fletcher
- The Breast Cancer Now Toby Robins Research Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Henrik Flyger
- Department of Breast Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
| | - Lin Fritschi
- School of Population Health, Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
| | - Marike Gabrielson
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Manuela Gago-Dominguez
- Genomic Medicine Group, International Cancer Genetics and Epidemiology Group, Fundación Pública Galega de Medicina Xenómica, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago, SERGAS, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| | - Montserrat García-Closas
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | | | - Jeanine Genkinger
- Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
- Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Graham G Giles
- Cancer Epidemiology Centre, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
| | - Mark Goldberg
- Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Royal Victoria Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, QU, Canada
| | - Pascal Guénel
- Team 'Exposome and Heredity', CESP, Gustave Roussy, INSERM, University Paris-Saclay, UVSQ, Villejuif, France
| | - Per Hall
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Oncology, Södersjukhuset, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Ute Hamann
- Molecular Genetics of Breast Cancer, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Wei He
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Peter Hillemanns
- Gynaecology Research Unit, Hannover Medical School, Hamburg, Germany
| | | | - Reiner Hoppe
- Dr Margarete Fischer Bosch Institute of Clinical Pharmacology, Stuttgart, Germany
- University of Tübingen, Tubingen, Germany
| | - John Hopper
- Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Simona Jakovchevska
- Research Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology 'Georgi D. Efremov', Skopje, North Macedonia
| | - Anna Jakubowska
- Department of Genetics and Pathology, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland
- Independent Laboratory of Molecular Biology and Genetic Diagnostics, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland
| | - Helena Jernström
- Oncology, Department of Clinical Sciences in Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
| | - Esther John
- Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Nichola Johnson
- The Breast Cancer Now Toby Robins Research Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Michael Jones
- Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
| | - Joseph Vijai
- Clinical Genetics Research Lab, Department of Cancer Biology and Genetics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Rudolf Kaaks
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Elza Khusnutdinova
- Institute of Biochemistry and Genetics, Ufa Federal Research Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Ufa, Russia
- Department of Genetics and Fundamental Medicine, Bashkir State University, Ufa, Russia
| | - Cari Kitahara
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Stella Koutros
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Vessela Kristensen
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Medical Genetics, Oslo University Hospital and University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Allison W Kurian
- Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - James Lacey
- Department of Computational and Quantitative Medicine, City of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA
- City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, City of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA
| | - Diether Lambrechts
- Laboratory for Translational Genetics, Department of Human Genetics, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- VIB Center for Cancer Biology, VIB, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Loic Le Marchand
- Epidemiology Program, University of Hawaii Cancer Center, Honolulu, HI, USA
| | - Flavio Lejbkowicz
- Clalit National Cancer Control Center, Carmel Medical Center and Technion Faculty of Medicine, Haifa, Israel
| | - Annika Lindblom
- Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | | | - Adriana Lori
- Department of Population Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Jan Lubinski
- Department of Genetics and Pathology, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland
| | - Arto Mannermaa
- Translational Cancer Research Area, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, Pathology and Forensic Medicine, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland
- Biobank of Eastern Finland, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland
| | - Mehdi Manoochehri
- Molecular Genetics of Breast Cancer, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Dimitrios Mavroudis
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospital of Heraklion, Heraklion, Greece
| | - Usha Menon
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College, London, UK
| | - AnnaMarie Mulligan
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Laboratory Medicine Program, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Rachel Murphy
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Ines Nevelsteen
- Leuven Multidisciplinary Breast Center, Department of Oncology, Leuven Cancer Institute, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - William G Newman
- North West Genomics Laboratory Hub, Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
- Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Nadia Obi
- Institute for Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Katie O'Brien
- Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, NIH, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Ken Offit
- Clinical Genetics Research Lab, Department of Cancer Biology and Genetics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Andrew Olshan
- Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health and UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | | | - Janet Olson
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Division of Epidemiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Salvatore Panico
- Dipertimento Di Medicina Clinca e Chirurgia, Federico II University, Naples, Italy
| | | | - Alpa Patel
- Department of Population Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Paolo Peterlongo
- Genome Diagnostics Program, IFOM ETS - the AIRC Institute of Molecular Oncology, Milan, Italy
| | - Brigitte Rack
- Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Paolo Radice
- Unit of Molecular Bases of Genetic Risk and Genetic Testing, Department of Research, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori (INT), Milan, Italy
| | - Gad Rennert
- Clalit National Cancer Control Center, Carmel Medical Center and Technion Faculty of Medicine, Haifa, Israel
| | - Valerie Rhenius
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Atocha Romero
- Laboratorio de Oncología Molecular, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain
| | | | - Dale Sandler
- Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, NIH, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Lukas Schwentner
- Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Mitul Shah
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Priyanka Sharma
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Westwood, KS, USA
| | - Jacques Simard
- Genomics Center, Molecular Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec, Quebec, Canada
| | - Melissa Southey
- Cancer Epidemiology Centre, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Clinical Pathology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Jennifer Stone
- Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Genetic Epidemiology Group, School of Population and Global Health, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
| | - William J Tapper
- Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Jack Taylor
- Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, NIH, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
- Epigenetic and Stem Cell Biology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, NIH, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Lauren Teras
- Department of Population Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Amanda E Toland
- Department of Cancer Biology and Genetics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Melissa Troester
- Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health and UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Thérèse Truong
- Team 'Exposome and Heredity', CESP, Gustave Roussy, INSERM, University Paris-Saclay, UVSQ, Villejuif, France
| | | | - Clarice Weinberg
- Biostatistics and Computational Biology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, NIH, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Camilla Wendt
- Department of Clinical Science and Education, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Xiaohong Rose Yang
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Wei Zheng
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Argyrios Ziogas
- Department of Medicine, Genetic Epidemiology Research Institute, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA
| | - Alison M Dunning
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Paul Pharoah
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Department of Computational Biomedicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, West Hollywood, CA, USA
| | - Douglas F Easton
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Shay Ben-Sachar
- Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
- Clalit Research Institute, Clalit Health Services, Ramat Gan, Israel
| | - Naama Elefant
- Clalit Research Institute, Clalit Health Services, Ramat Gan, Israel
- Department of Genetics, Hadassah Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Ron Shamir
- The Blavatnik School of Computer Science, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Ran Elkon
- Department of Human Molecular Genetics and Biochemistry, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Heine J, Fowler EEE, Weinfurtner RJ, Hume E, Tworoger SS. Breast density analysis of digital breast tomosynthesis. Sci Rep 2023; 13:18760. [PMID: 37907569 PMCID: PMC10618274 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-45402-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2023] [Accepted: 10/19/2023] [Indexed: 11/02/2023] Open
Abstract
Mammography shifted to digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in the US. An automated percentage of breast density (PD) technique designed for two-dimensional (2D) applications was evaluated with DBT using several breast cancer risk prediction measures: normalized-volumetric; dense volume; applied to the volume slices and averaged (slice-mean); and applied to synthetic 2D images. Volumetric measures were derived theoretically. PD was modeled as a function of compressed breast thickness (CBT). The mean and standard deviation of the pixel values were investigated. A matched case-control (CC) study (n = 426 pairs) was evaluated. Odd ratios (ORs) were estimated with 95% confidence intervals. ORs were significant for PD: identical for volumetric and slice-mean measures [OR = 1.43 (1.18, 1.72)] and [OR = 1.44 (1.18, 1.75)] for synthetic images. A 2nd degree polynomial (concave-down) was used to model PD as a function of CBT: location of the maximum PD value was similar across CCs, occurring at 0.41 × CBT, and PD was significant [OR = 1.47 (1.21, 1.78)]. The means from the volume and synthetic images were also significant [ORs ~ 1.31 (1.09, 1.57)]. An alternative standardized 2D synthetic image was constructed, where each pixel value represents the percentage of breast density above its location. Several measures were significant and an alternative method for constructing a standardized 2D synthetic image was produced.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John Heine
- Cancer Epidemiology Department, Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, 12902 Bruce B. Downs Blvd, Tampa, FL, 33612, USA.
| | - Erin E E Fowler
- Cancer Epidemiology Department, Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, 12902 Bruce B. Downs Blvd, Tampa, FL, 33612, USA
| | - R Jared Weinfurtner
- Diagnostic Imaging and Interventional Radiology, Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, 12902 Bruce B. Downs Blvd, Tampa, FL, 33612, USA
| | - Emma Hume
- Cancer Epidemiology Department, Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, 12902 Bruce B. Downs Blvd, Tampa, FL, 33612, USA
| | - Shelley S Tworoger
- Cancer Epidemiology Department, Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, 12902 Bruce B. Downs Blvd, Tampa, FL, 33612, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Strandberg R, Czene K, Hall P, Humphreys K. Novel predictions of invasive breast cancer risk in mammography screening cohorts. Stat Med 2023; 42:3816-3837. [PMID: 37337390 DOI: 10.1002/sim.9834] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2022] [Revised: 05/23/2023] [Accepted: 06/04/2023] [Indexed: 06/21/2023]
Abstract
Mammography screening programs are aimed at reducing mortality due to breast cancer by detecting tumors at an early stage. There is currently interest in moving away from the age-based screening programs, and toward personalized screening based on individual risk factors. To accomplish this, risk prediction models for breast cancer are needed to determine who should be screened, and when. We develop a novel approach using a (random effects) continuous growth model, which we apply to a large population-based, Swedish screening cohort. Unlike existing breast cancer prediction models, this approach explicitly incorporates each woman's individual screening visits in the prediction. It jointly models invasive breast cancer tumor onset, tumor growth rate, symptomatic detection rate, and screening sensitivity. In addition to predicting the overall risk of invasive breast cancer, this model can make separate predictions regarding specific tumor sizes, and the mode of detection (eg, detected at screening, or through symptoms between screenings). It can also predict how these risks change depending on whether or not a woman will attend her next screening. In our study, we predict, given a future diagnosis, that the probability of having a tumor less than (as opposed to greater than) 10-mm diameter, at detection, will be, on average, 2.6 times higher if a woman in the cohort attends their next screening. This indicates that the model can be used to evaluate the short-term benefit of screening attendance, at an individual level.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rickard Strandberg
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Swedish eScience Research Centre (SeRC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Kamila Czene
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Per Hall
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Keith Humphreys
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Swedish eScience Research Centre (SeRC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Louro J, Román M, Moshina N, Olstad CF, Larsen M, Sagstad S, Castells X, Hofvind S. Personalized Breast Cancer Screening: A Risk Prediction Model Based on Women Attending BreastScreen Norway. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:4517. [PMID: 37760486 PMCID: PMC10526465 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15184517] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2023] [Revised: 09/06/2023] [Accepted: 09/09/2023] [Indexed: 09/29/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND We aimed to develop and validate a model predicting breast cancer risk for women targeted by breast cancer screening. METHOD This retrospective cohort study included 57,411 women screened at least once in BreastScreen Norway during the period from 2007 to 2019. The prediction model included information about age, mammographic density, family history of breast cancer, body mass index, age at menarche, alcohol consumption, exercise, pregnancy, hormone replacement therapy, and benign breast disease. We calculated a 4-year absolute breast cancer risk estimates for women and in risk groups by quartiles. The Bootstrap resampling method was used for internal validation of the model (E/O ratio). The area under the curve (AUC) was estimated with a 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS The 4-year predicted risk of breast cancer ranged from 0.22-7.33%, while 95% of the population had a risk of 0.55-2.31%. The thresholds for the quartiles of the risk groups, with 25% of the population in each group, were 0.82%, 1.10%, and 1.47%. Overall, the model slightly overestimated the risk with an E/O ratio of 1.10 (95% CI: 1.09-1.11) and the AUC was 62.6% (95% CI: 60.5-65.0%). CONCLUSIONS This 4-year risk prediction model showed differences in the risk of breast cancer, supporting personalized screening for breast cancer in women aged 50-69 years.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Javier Louro
- Department of Epidemiology and Evaluation, Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute, 08003 Barcelona, Spain; (J.L.); (M.R.); (X.C.)
- Network for Research on Chronicity, Primary Care, and Health Promotion (RICAPPS), 48902 Barakaldo, Spain
| | - Marta Román
- Department of Epidemiology and Evaluation, Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute, 08003 Barcelona, Spain; (J.L.); (M.R.); (X.C.)
- Network for Research on Chronicity, Primary Care, and Health Promotion (RICAPPS), 48902 Barakaldo, Spain
| | - Nataliia Moshina
- Section for Breast Cancer Screening, Cancer Registry of Norway, 0304 Oslo, Norway; (N.M.); (C.F.O.); (M.L.); (S.S.)
| | - Camilla F. Olstad
- Section for Breast Cancer Screening, Cancer Registry of Norway, 0304 Oslo, Norway; (N.M.); (C.F.O.); (M.L.); (S.S.)
| | - Marthe Larsen
- Section for Breast Cancer Screening, Cancer Registry of Norway, 0304 Oslo, Norway; (N.M.); (C.F.O.); (M.L.); (S.S.)
| | - Silje Sagstad
- Section for Breast Cancer Screening, Cancer Registry of Norway, 0304 Oslo, Norway; (N.M.); (C.F.O.); (M.L.); (S.S.)
| | - Xavier Castells
- Department of Epidemiology and Evaluation, Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute, 08003 Barcelona, Spain; (J.L.); (M.R.); (X.C.)
- Network for Research on Chronicity, Primary Care, and Health Promotion (RICAPPS), 48902 Barakaldo, Spain
| | - Solveig Hofvind
- Section for Breast Cancer Screening, Cancer Registry of Norway, 0304 Oslo, Norway; (N.M.); (C.F.O.); (M.L.); (S.S.)
- Department of Health and Care Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, UiT, The Arctic University of Norway, 9037 Tromsø, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Jarm K, Zadnik V, Birk M, Vrhovec M, Hertl K, Klanecek Z, Studen A, Sval C, Krajc M. Breast cancer risk assessment and risk distribution in 3,491 Slovenian women invited for screening at the age of 50; a population-based cross-sectional study. Radiol Oncol 2023; 57:337-347. [PMID: 37665745 PMCID: PMC10476908 DOI: 10.2478/raon-2023-0039] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2023] [Accepted: 07/06/2023] [Indexed: 09/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The evidence shows that risk-based strategy could be implemented to avoid unnecessary harm in mammography screening for breast cancer (BC) using age-only criterium. Our study aimed at identifying the uptake of Slovenian women to the BC risk assessment invitation and assessing the number of screening mammographies in case of risk-based screening. PATIENTS AND METHODS A cross-sectional population-based study enrolled 11,898 women at the age of 50, invited to BC screening. The data on BC risk factors, including breast density from the first 3,491 study responders was collected and BC risk was assessed using the Tyrer-Cuzick algorithm (version 8) to classify women into risk groups (low, population, moderately increased, and high risk group). The number of screening mammographies according to risk stratification was simulated. RESULTS 57% (6,785) of women returned BC risk questionnaires. When stratifying 3,491 women into risk groups, 34.0% were assessed with low, 62.2% with population, 3.4% with moderately increased, and 0.4% with high 10-year BC risk. In the case of potential personalised screening, the number of screening mammographies would drop by 38.6% compared to the current screening policy. CONCLUSIONS The study uptake showed the feasibility of risk assessment when inviting women to regular BC screening. 3.8% of Slovenian women were recognised with higher than population 10-year BC risk. According to Slovenian BC guidelines they may be screened more often. Overall, personalised screening would decrease the number of screening mammographies in Slovenia. This information is to be considered when planning the pilot and assessing the feasibility of implementing population risk-based screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katja Jarm
- Sector for Cancer Screening and Clinical Genetics, Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
- Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Primorska, Izola, Slovenia
| | - Vesna Zadnik
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
- Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Primorska, Izola, Slovenia
- Sector for Oncology Epidemiology and Cancer Registry, Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Mojca Birk
- Sector for Oncology Epidemiology and Cancer Registry, Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Milos Vrhovec
- Sector for Cancer Screening and Clinical Genetics, Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Kristijana Hertl
- Sector for Cancer Screening and Clinical Genetics, Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Zan Klanecek
- Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Andrej Studen
- Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Cveto Sval
- Sector for Cancer Screening and Clinical Genetics, Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Mateja Krajc
- Sector for Cancer Screening and Clinical Genetics, Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
- Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Primorska, Izola, Slovenia
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Bertsimas D, Ma Y, Nohadani O. Personalized Breast Cancer Screening. JCO Clin Cancer Inform 2023; 7:e2300026. [PMID: 37843071 DOI: 10.1200/cci.23.00026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2023] [Revised: 07/31/2023] [Accepted: 08/22/2023] [Indexed: 10/17/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Abundant literature and clinical trials indicate that routine cancer screenings decrease patient mortality for several common cancers. However, current national cancer screening guidelines heavily rely on patient age as the predominant factor in deciding cancer screening timing, neglecting other important medical characteristics of individual patients. This approach either delays screening or prescribes excessive screenings. Another disadvantage of the current approach is its inability to combine information across hospital systems because of the lack of a coherent records system. METHODS We propose to use claims data and medical insurance transactions that use consistent and pre-established sets of codes for diagnosis, procedures, and medications to develop a clinical support tool to supply supplemental insights and precautions for physicians to make more informed decisions. Furthermore, we propose a novel machine learning framework to recommend personalized, data-driven, and dynamic screening decisions. RESULTS We apply this new method to the study of breast cancer mammograms using claims data from 378,840 female patients to demonstrate that across different risk populations, personalized screening reduces the average delay in a cancer diagnosis by 2-3 months with statistical significance, with even stronger benefits for individual patients up to 10 months. CONCLUSION Incorporating personal medical characteristics using claims data and novel machine learning methodologies into breast cancer screening improves screening delay by more dynamically considering changing patient risks. Future incorporation of the proposed methodology in health care settings could be provided as a potential support tool for clinicians.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dimitris Bertsimas
- Sloan School of Management and Operations Research Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
| | - Yu Ma
- Sloan School of Management and Operations Research Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
| | - Omid Nohadani
- Artificial Intelligence and Data Science, Benefits Science Technologies, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Strandberg R, Illipse M, Czene K, Hall P, Humphreys K. Influence of mammographic density and compressed breast thickness on true mammographic sensitivity: a cohort study. Sci Rep 2023; 13:14194. [PMID: 37648804 PMCID: PMC10468499 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-41356-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2023] [Accepted: 08/24/2023] [Indexed: 09/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Understanding the detectability of breast cancer using mammography is important when considering nation-wide screening programmes. Although the role of imaging settings on image quality has been studied extensively, their role in detectability of cancer at a population level is less well studied. We wish to quantify the association between mammographic screening sensitivity and various imaging parameters. Using a novel approach applied to a population-based breast cancer screening cohort, we specifically focus on sensitivity as defined in the classical diagnostic testing literature, as opposed to the screen-detected cancer rate, which is often used as a measure of sensitivity for monitoring and evaluating breast cancer screening. We use a natural history approach to model the presence and size of latent tumors at risk of detection at mammography screening, and the screening sensitivity is modeled as a logistic function of tumor size. With this approach we study the influence of compressed breast thickness, x-ray exposure, and compression pressure, in addition to (percent) breast density, on the screening test sensitivity. When adjusting for all screening parameters in addition to latent tumor size, we find that percent breast density and compressed breast thickness are statistically significant factors for the detectability of breast cancer. A change in breast density from 6.6 to 33.5% (the inter-quartile range) reduced the odds of detection by 61% (95% CI 48-71). Similarly, a change in compressed breast thickness from 46 to 66 mm reduced the odds by 42% (95% CI 21-57). The true sensitivity of mammography, defined as the probability that an examination leads to a positive result if a tumour is present in the breast, is associated with compressed breast thickness after accounting for mammographic density and tumour size. This can be used to guide studies of setups aimed at improving lesion detection. Compressed breast thickness-in addition to breast density-should be considered when assigning complementary screening modalities and personalized screening intervals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rickard Strandberg
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
- Swedish eScience Research Centre (SeRC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
| | - Maya Illipse
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Swedish eScience Research Centre (SeRC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Kamila Czene
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Per Hall
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Keith Humphreys
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Swedish eScience Research Centre (SeRC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Mertens E, Barrenechea-Pulache A, Sagastume D, Vasquez MS, Vandevijvere S, Peñalvo JL. Understanding the contribution of lifestyle in breast cancer risk prediction: a systematic review of models applicable to Europe. BMC Cancer 2023; 23:687. [PMID: 37480028 PMCID: PMC10360320 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-11174-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/03/2023] [Accepted: 07/12/2023] [Indexed: 07/23/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Breast cancer (BC) is a significant health concern among European women, with the highest prevalence rates among all cancers. Existing BC prediction models account for major risks such as hereditary, hormonal and reproductive factors, but research suggests that adherence to a healthy lifestyle can reduce the risk of developing BC to some extent. Understanding the influence and predictive role of lifestyle variables in current risk prediction models could help identify actionable, modifiable, targets among high-risk population groups. PURPOSE To systematically review population-based BC risk prediction models applicable to European populations and identify lifestyle predictors and their corresponding parameter values for a better understanding of their relative contribution to the prediction of incident BC. METHODS A systematic review was conducted in PubMed, Embase and Web of Science from January 2000 to August 2021. Risk prediction models were included if (i) developed and/or validated in adult cancer-free women in Europe, (ii) based on easily ascertained information, and (iii) reported models' final predictors. To investigate further the comparability of lifestyle predictors across models, estimates were standardised into risk ratios and visualised using forest plots. RESULTS From a total of 49 studies, 33 models were developed and 22 different existing models, mostly from Gail (22 studies) and Tyrer-Cuzick and co-workers (12 studies) were validated or modified for European populations. Family history of BC was the most frequently included predictor (31 models), while body mass index (BMI) and alcohol consumption (26 and 21 models, respectively) were the lifestyle predictors most often included, followed by smoking and physical activity (7 and 6 models respectively). Overall, for lifestyle predictors, their modest predictive contribution was greater for riskier lifestyle levels, though highly variable model estimates across different models. CONCLUSIONS Given the increasing BC incidence rates in Europe, risk models utilising readily available risk factors could greatly aid in widening the population coverage of screening efforts, while the addition of lifestyle factors could help improving model performance and serve as intervention targets of prevention programmes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elly Mertens
- Unit of Non-Communicable Diseases, Department of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Nationalestraat 155, 2000, Antwerp, Belgium.
| | - Antonio Barrenechea-Pulache
- Unit of Non-Communicable Diseases, Department of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Nationalestraat 155, 2000, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Diana Sagastume
- Unit of Non-Communicable Diseases, Department of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Nationalestraat 155, 2000, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Maria Salve Vasquez
- Health Information, Scientific Institute of Public Health (Sciensano), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Stefanie Vandevijvere
- Health Information, Scientific Institute of Public Health (Sciensano), Brussels, Belgium
| | - José L Peñalvo
- Unit of Non-Communicable Diseases, Department of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Nationalestraat 155, 2000, Antwerp, Belgium
- Global Health Institute, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Lapointe J, Côté JM, Mbuya-Bienge C, Dorval M, Pashayan N, Chiquette J, Eloy L, Turgeon A, Lambert-Côté L, Brooks JD, Walker MJ, Blackmore KM, Joly Y, Knoppers BM, Chiarelli AM, Simard J, Nabi H. Canadian Healthcare Professionals' Views and Attitudes toward Risk-Stratified Breast Cancer Screening. J Pers Med 2023; 13:1027. [PMID: 37511640 PMCID: PMC10381377 DOI: 10.3390/jpm13071027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2023] [Revised: 06/02/2023] [Accepted: 06/19/2023] [Indexed: 07/30/2023] Open
Abstract
Given the controversy over the effectiveness of age-based breast cancer (BC) screening, offering risk-stratified screening to women may be a way to improve patient outcomes with detection of earlier-stage disease. While this approach seems promising, its integration requires the buy-in of many stakeholders. In this cross-sectional study, we surveyed Canadian healthcare professionals about their views and attitudes toward a risk-stratified BC screening approach. An anonymous online questionnaire was disseminated through Canadian healthcare professional associations between November 2020 and May 2021. Information collected included attitudes toward BC screening recommendations based on individual risk, comfort and perceived readiness related to the possible implementation of this approach. Close to 90% of the 593 respondents agreed with increased frequency and earlier initiation of BC screening for women at high risk. However, only 9% agreed with the idea of not offering BC screening to women at very low risk. Respondents indicated that primary care physicians and nurse practitioners should play a leading role in the risk-stratified BC screening approach. This survey identifies health services and policy enhancements that would be needed to support future implementation of a risk-stratified BC screening approach in healthcare systems in Canada and other countries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julie Lapointe
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, 1050, Chemin Sainte-Foy, Québec City, QC G1S 4L8, Canada
| | - Jean-Martin Côté
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, 1050, Chemin Sainte-Foy, Québec City, QC G1S 4L8, Canada
| | - Cynthia Mbuya-Bienge
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, 1050, Chemin Sainte-Foy, Québec City, QC G1S 4L8, Canada
- Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, 1050, Av de la Médecine, Québec City, QC G1V 0A6, Canada
| | - Michel Dorval
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, 1050, Chemin Sainte-Foy, Québec City, QC G1S 4L8, Canada
- Faculty of Pharmacy, Université Laval, 1050, Av de la Médecine, Québec City, QC G1V 0A6, Canada
- CISSS de Chaudière-Appalaches Research Center, 143 Rue Wolfe, Lévis, QC G6V 3Z1, Canada
| | - Nora Pashayan
- Department of Applied Health Research, Institute of Epidemiology and Healthcare, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Jocelyne Chiquette
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, 1050, Chemin Sainte-Foy, Québec City, QC G1S 4L8, Canada
- CHU de Québec-Université Laval, 1050, Chemin Sainte-Foy, Québec City, QC G1S 4L8, Canada
| | - Laurence Eloy
- Programme Québécois de Cancérologie, Ministère de la Santé et des Services Sociaux, 1075, Chemin Sainte-Foy, Québec City, QC G1S 2M1, Canada
| | - Annie Turgeon
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, 1050, Chemin Sainte-Foy, Québec City, QC G1S 4L8, Canada
| | - Laurence Lambert-Côté
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, 1050, Chemin Sainte-Foy, Québec City, QC G1S 4L8, Canada
| | - Jennifer D Brooks
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155, College Street, Toronto, ON M5T 3M7, Canada
| | - Meghan J Walker
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155, College Street, Toronto, ON M5T 3M7, Canada
- Cancer Care Ontario, Ontario Health, 525, University Avenue, Toronto, ON M5G 2L3, Canada
| | | | - Yann Joly
- Centre of Genomics and Policy, McGill University, 740, Ave Penfield, Montreal, QC H3A 0G1, Canada
- Human Genetics Department and Bioethics Unit, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, 3647, Peel Street, Montreal, QC G1V 0A6, Canada
| | - Bartha Maria Knoppers
- Centre of Genomics and Policy, McGill University, 740, Ave Penfield, Montreal, QC H3A 0G1, Canada
| | - Anna Maria Chiarelli
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155, College Street, Toronto, ON M5T 3M7, Canada
- Cancer Care Ontario, Ontario Health, 525, University Avenue, Toronto, ON M5G 2L3, Canada
| | - Jacques Simard
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, 1050, Chemin Sainte-Foy, Québec City, QC G1S 4L8, Canada
- Department of Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, 1050, Avenue de la Médecine, Québec City, QC G1V 0A6, Canada
| | - Hermann Nabi
- Oncology Division, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, 1050, Chemin Sainte-Foy, Québec City, QC G1S 4L8, Canada
- Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, 1050, Av de la Médecine, Québec City, QC G1V 0A6, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Ho PJ, Lim EH, Mohamed Ri NKB, Hartman M, Wong FY, Li J. Will Absolute Risk Estimation for Time to Next Screen Work for an Asian Mammography Screening Population? Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15092559. [PMID: 37174025 PMCID: PMC10177032 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15092559] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2023] [Revised: 04/26/2023] [Accepted: 04/27/2023] [Indexed: 05/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Personalized breast cancer risk profiling has the potential to promote shared decision-making and improve compliance with routine screening. We assessed the Gail model's performance in predicting the short-term (2- and 5-year) and the long-term (10- and 15-year) absolute risks in 28,234 asymptomatic Asian women. Absolute risks were calculated using different relative risk estimates and Breast cancer incidence and mortality rates (White, Asian-American, or the Singapore Asian population). Using linear models, we tested the association of absolute risk and age at breast cancer occurrence. Model discrimination was moderate (AUC range: 0.580-0.628). Calibration was better for longer-term prediction horizons (E/Olong-term ranges: 0.86-1.71; E/Oshort-term ranges:1.24-3.36). Subgroup analyses show that the model underestimates risk in women with breast cancer family history, positive recall status, and prior breast biopsy, and overestimates risk in underweight women. The Gail model absolute risk does not predict the age of breast cancer occurrence. Breast cancer risk prediction tools performed better with population-specific parameters. Two-year absolute risk estimation is attractive for breast cancer screening programs, but the models tested are not suitable for identifying Asian women at increased risk within this short interval.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peh Joo Ho
- Genome Institute of Singapore (GIS), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), 60 Biopolis Street, Genome, Singapore 138672, Singapore
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore 117549, Singapore
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore 119228, Singapore
| | - Elaine Hsuen Lim
- Division of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore 168583, Singapore
| | - Nur Khaliesah Binte Mohamed Ri
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore 117549, Singapore
| | - Mikael Hartman
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore 117549, Singapore
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore 119228, Singapore
- Department of Surgery, University Surgical Cluster, National University Hospital, Singapore 119228, Singapore
| | - Fuh Yong Wong
- Division of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore 168583, Singapore
| | - Jingmei Li
- Genome Institute of Singapore (GIS), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), 60 Biopolis Street, Genome, Singapore 138672, Singapore
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore 119228, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Heine J, Fowler EE, Weinfurtner RJ, Hume E, Tworoger SS. Breast Density Analysis Using Digital Breast Tomosynthesis. BIORXIV : THE PREPRINT SERVER FOR BIOLOGY 2023:2023.02.10.527911. [PMID: 36824710 PMCID: PMC9948963 DOI: 10.1101/2023.02.10.527911] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/16/2023]
Abstract
We evaluated an automated percentage of breast density (BD) technique (PDa) with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) data. The approach is based on the wavelet expansion followed by analyzing signal dependent noise. Several measures were investigated as risk factors: normalized volumetric; total dense volume; average of the DBT slices (slice-mean); a two-dimensional (2D) metric applied to the synthetic images; and the mean and standard deviations of the pixel values. Volumetric measures were derived theoretically, and PDa was modeled as a function of compressed breast thickness. An alternative method for constructing synthetic 2D mammograms was investigated using the volume results. A matched case-control study (n = 426 pairs) was analyzed. Conditional logistic regression modeling, controlling body mass index and ethnicity, was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) for each measure with 95% confidence intervals provided parenthetically. There were several significant findings: volumetric measure [OR = 1.43 (1.18, 1.72)], which produced an identical OR as the slice-mean measure as predicted; [OR =1.44 (1.18, 1.75)] when applied to the synthetic images; and mean of the pixel values (volume or 2D synthetic) [ORs ~ 1.31 (1.09, 1.57)]. PDa was modeled as 2nd degree polynomial (concave-down): its maximum value occurred at 0.41×(compressed breast thickness), which was similar across case-control groups, and was significant from this position [OR = 1.47 (1.21, 1.78)]. A standardized 2D synthetic image was produced, where each pixel value represents the percentage of BD above its location. The significant findings indicate the validity of the technique. Derivations supported by empirical analyses produced a new synthetic 2D standardized image technique. Ancillary to the objectives, the results provide evidence for understanding the percentage of BD measure applied to 2D mammograms. Notwithstanding the findings, the study design provides a template for investigating other measures such as texture.
Collapse
|
19
|
Durham DD, Abraham LA, Roberts MC, Khan CP, Smith RA, Kerlikowske K, Miglioretti DL. Breast cancer incidence among women with a family history of breast cancer by relative's age at diagnosis. Cancer 2022; 128:4232-4240. [PMID: 36262035 PMCID: PMC9712500 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.34365] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2021] [Revised: 11/03/2021] [Accepted: 01/07/2022] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Women with a first-degree family history of breast cancer are often advised to begin screening when they are 10 years younger than the age at which their relative was diagnosed. Evidence is lacking to determine how much earlier they should begin. METHODS Using Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium data on screening mammograms from 1996 to 2016, the authors constructed a cohort of 306,147 women 30-59 years of age with information on first-degree family history of breast cancer and relative's age at diagnosis. The authors compared cumulative 5-year breast cancer incidence among women with and without a first-degree family history of breast by relative's age at diagnosis and by screening age. RESULTS Among 306,147 women included in the study, approximately 11% reported a first-degree family history of breast cancer with 3885 breast cancer cases identified. Women reporting a relative diagnosed between 40 and 49 years and undergoing screening between ages 30 and 39 or 40 and 49 had similar 5-year cumulative incidences of breast cancer (respectively, 18.6/1000; 95% confidence interval [CI], 12.1, 25.7; 18.4/1000; 95% CI, 13.7, 23.5) as women without a family history undergoing screening between 50-59 years of age (18.0/1000; 95% CI, 17.0, 19.1). For relative's diagnosis age from 35 to 45 years of age, initiating screening 5-8 years before diagnosis age resulted in a 5-year cumulative incidence of breast cancer of 15.2/1000, that of an average 50-year-old woman. CONCLUSION Women with a relative diagnosed at or before age 45 may wish to consider, in consultation with their provider, initiating screening 5-8 years earlier than their relative's diagnosis age.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Danielle D. Durham
- Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
- Cancer Prevention Fellowship Program, Division of Cancer Prevention, Healthcare Delivery Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Linn A. Abraham
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Kaiser Permanente Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Megan C. Roberts
- Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, University of North Carolina Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
- Cancer Prevention Fellowship Program, Division of Cancer Prevention, Behavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Carly P. Khan
- Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
- Cancer Prevention Fellowship Program, Division of Cancer Prevention, Community Oncology and Prevention Trials Research Group, Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Robert A. Smith
- Cancer Control Department, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Karla Kerlikowske
- Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Diana L. Miglioretti
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Kaiser Permanente Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Division of Biostatistics, Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis, Davis, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Marzo-Castillejo M, Bartolomé-Moreno C, Bellas-Beceiro B, Melús-Palazón E, Vela-Vallespín C. [PAPPS Expert Groups. Cancer prevention recommendations: Update 2022]. Aten Primaria 2022; 54 Suppl 1:102440. [PMID: 36435580 PMCID: PMC9705215 DOI: 10.1016/j.aprim.2022.102440] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/26/2022] [Accepted: 06/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Cancer is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Tobacco use, unhealthy diet, and physical inactivity are some of the lifestyle risk factors that have led to an increase in cancer. This article updates the evidence and includes recommendations for prevention strategies for each of the cancers with the highest incidence. These are based on the reduction of risk factors (primary prevention) and early diagnosis of cancer through screening and early detection of signs and symptoms, in medium-risk and high-risk populations. This update of the 2022 PAPPS has taken into account the vision of the National Health System Cancer Strategy, an update approved by the Interterritorial Council of the National Health System on January 2021 and the European Strategy (Europe's Beating Cancer Plan) presented on 4 February 2021.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mercè Marzo-Castillejo
- Unitat de Suport a la Recerca Metropolitana Sud, IDIAP Jordi Gol, Direcció d'Atenció Primària Costa de Ponent, Institut Català de la Salut, Barcelona, España.
| | - Cruz Bartolomé-Moreno
- Centro de Salud Parque Goya de Zaragoza y Unidad Docente de Atención Familiar y Comunitaria Sector Zaragoza I, Servicio Aragonés de Salud, Zaragoza, España
| | - Begoña Bellas-Beceiro
- Unidad Docente de Atención Familiar y Comunitaria La Laguna-Tenerife Norte, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Canarias, La Laguna, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, España
| | - Elena Melús-Palazón
- Centro de Salud Actur Oeste de Zaragoza y Unidad Docente de Atención Familiar y Comunitaria Sector Zaragoza I, Servicio Aragonés de Salud, Zaragoza, España
| | - Carmen Vela-Vallespín
- ABS del Riu Nord i Riu Sud, Institut Català de la Salut, Santa Coloma de Gramenet, Barcelona, España
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Lim YX, Lim ZL, Ho PJ, Li J. Breast Cancer in Asia: Incidence, Mortality, Early Detection, Mammography Programs, and Risk-Based Screening Initiatives. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:4218. [PMID: 36077752 PMCID: PMC9454998 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14174218] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2022] [Revised: 08/24/2022] [Accepted: 08/26/2022] [Indexed: 12/09/2022] Open
Abstract
Close to half (45.4%) of the 2.3 million breast cancers (BC) diagnosed in 2020 were from Asia. While the burden of breast cancer has been examined at the level of broad geographic regions, literature on more in-depth coverage of the individual countries and subregions of the Asian continent is lacking. This narrative review examines the breast cancer burden in 47 Asian countries. Breast cancer screening guidelines and risk-based screening initiatives are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yu Xian Lim
- Genome Institute of Singapore, Laboratory of Women’s Health & Genetics, Singapore 138672, Singapore
| | - Zi Lin Lim
- Genome Institute of Singapore, Laboratory of Women’s Health & Genetics, Singapore 138672, Singapore
| | - Peh Joo Ho
- Genome Institute of Singapore, Laboratory of Women’s Health & Genetics, Singapore 138672, Singapore
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117549, Singapore
| | - Jingmei Li
- Genome Institute of Singapore, Laboratory of Women’s Health & Genetics, Singapore 138672, Singapore
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117597, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Laza-Vásquez C, Martínez-Alonso M, Forné-Izquierdo C, Vilaplana-Mayoral J, Cruz-Esteve I, Sánchez-López I, Reñé-Reñé M, Cazorla-Sánchez C, Hernández-Andreu M, Galindo-Ortego G, Llorens-Gabandé M, Pons-Rodríguez A, Rué M. Feasibility and Acceptability of Personalized Breast Cancer Screening (DECIDO Study): A Single-Arm Proof-of-Concept Trial. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2022; 19:10426. [PMID: 36012059 PMCID: PMC9407798 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191610426] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/15/2022] [Revised: 08/11/2022] [Accepted: 08/18/2022] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
The aim of this study was to assess the acceptability and feasibility of offering risk-based breast cancer screening and its integration into regular clinical practice. A single-arm proof-of-concept trial was conducted with a sample of 387 women aged 40-50 years residing in the city of Lleida (Spain). The study intervention consisted of breast cancer risk estimation, risk communication and screening recommendations, and a follow-up. A polygenic risk score with 83 single nucleotide polymorphisms was used to update the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium risk model and estimate the 5-year absolute risk of breast cancer. The women expressed a positive attitude towards varying the frequency of breast screening according to individual risk and, especially, more frequently inviting women at higher-than-average risk. A lower intensity screening for women at lower risk was not as welcome, although half of the participants would accept it. Knowledge of the benefits and harms of breast screening was low, especially with regard to false positives and overdiagnosis. The women expressed a high understanding of individual risk and screening recommendations. The participants' intention to participate in risk-based screening and satisfaction at 1-year were very high.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Celmira Laza-Vásquez
- Department of Nursing and Physiotherapy and Health Care Research Group (GRECS), IRBLleida—Institut de Recerca Biomèdica de Lleida, University of Lleida, 25198 Lleida, Spain
| | - Montserrat Martínez-Alonso
- IRBLleida—Institut de Recerca Biomèdica de Lleida, Department of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Lleida, 25198 Lleida, Spain
| | - Carles Forné-Izquierdo
- Department of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Lleida, 25198 Lleida, Spain
- Heorfy Consulting, 25007 Lleida, Spain
| | - Jordi Vilaplana-Mayoral
- Department of Computing and Industrial Engineering, University of Lleida, 25001 Lleida, Spain
| | - Inés Cruz-Esteve
- Primer de Maig Basic Health Area, Catalan Institute of Health, 25003 Lleida, Spain
| | | | - Mercè Reñé-Reñé
- Department of Radiology, Arnau de Vilanova University Hospital, 25198 Lleida, Spain
| | | | | | | | | | - Anna Pons-Rodríguez
- Example Basic Health Area, Catalan Institute of Health, 25006 Lleida, Spain
- Health PhD Program, University of Lleida, 25198 Lleida, Spain
| | - Montserrat Rué
- IRBLleida—Institut de Recerca Biomèdica de Lleida, Department of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Lleida, 25198 Lleida, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Sharafeldin N, Zhang J, Singh P, Bosworth A, Chen Y, Patel SK, Wang X, Francisco L, Forman SJ, Wong FL, Ojesina AI, Bhatia S. Genome-wide variants and polygenic risk scores for cognitive impairment following blood or marrow transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2022; 57:925-933. [PMID: 35379913 PMCID: PMC9233077 DOI: 10.1038/s41409-022-01642-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/26/2021] [Revised: 03/09/2022] [Accepted: 03/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
Cognitive impairment is prevalent in blood or marrow transplantation (BMT) recipients, albeit with inter-individual variability. We conducted a genome-wide association study of objective cognitive function assessed longitudinally in 239 adult BMT recipients for discovery and replicated in an independent cohort of 540 BMT survivors. Weighted genome-wide polygenic risk scores (PRS) were constructed using linkage disequilibrium pruned significant SNPs. Forty-four genome-wide significant SNPs were identified using additive (n = 3); codominant (n = 20) and genotype models (n = 21). Each additional copy of a risk allele was associated with a 0.28-point (p = 1.07 × 10-8) to a 1.82-point (p = 6.7 × 10-12) increase in a global deficit score. We replicated two SNPs (rs11634183 and rs12486041) with links to neural integrity. Patients in the top PRS quintile were at increased risk of cognitive impairment in discovery (RR = 1.95, 95%CI: 1.28-2.96, p = 0.002) and replication cohorts (OR = 1.84, 95%CI, 1.02-3.32, p = 0.043). Associations were stronger among individuals with lowest clinical risk for cognitive impairment. These findings support potential utility of PRS-based risk classification in the development of targeted interventions aimed at improving cognitive outcomes in BMT survivors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Noha Sharafeldin
- Institute for Cancer Outcomes and Survivorship, Heersink School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
| | - Jianqing Zhang
- Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | - Purnima Singh
- Institute for Cancer Outcomes and Survivorship, Heersink School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | | | - Yanjun Chen
- Institute for Cancer Outcomes and Survivorship, Heersink School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | | | - Xuexia Wang
- Department of Mathematics, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA
| | - Liton Francisco
- Institute for Cancer Outcomes and Survivorship, Heersink School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | - Stephen J Forman
- Hematology and Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation, City of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA
| | | | - Akinyemi I Ojesina
- Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | - Smita Bhatia
- Institute for Cancer Outcomes and Survivorship, Heersink School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Overdetection of Breast Cancer. Curr Oncol 2022; 29:3894-3910. [PMID: 35735420 PMCID: PMC9222123 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol29060311] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2022] [Revised: 05/16/2022] [Accepted: 05/17/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Overdetection (often referred to as overdiagnosis) of cancer is the detection of disease, such as through a screening program, that would otherwise remain occult through an individual’s life. In the context of screening, this could occur for cancers that were slow growing or indolent, or simply because an unscreened individual would have died from some other cause before the cancer had surfaced clinically. The main harm associated with overdetection is the subsequent overdiagnosis and overtreatment of disease. In this article, the phenomenon is reviewed, the methods of estimation of overdetection are discussed and reasons for variability in such estimates are given, with emphasis on an analysis using Canadian data. Microsimulation modeling is used to illustrate the expected time course of cancer detection that gives rise to overdetection. While overdetection exists, the actual amount is likely to be much lower than the estimate used by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. Furthermore, the issue is of greater significance in older rather than younger women due to competing causes of death. The particular challenge associated with in situ breast cancer is considered and possible approaches to avoiding overtreatment are suggested.
Collapse
|
25
|
Pons-Rodriguez A, Marzo-Castillejo M, Cruz-Esteve I, Galindo-Ortego G, Hernández-Leal MJ, Rué M. [Moving toward personalized breast cancer screening: The role of Primary Care]. Aten Primaria 2022; 54:102288. [PMID: 35477080 PMCID: PMC9061619 DOI: 10.1016/j.aprim.2022.102288] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2021] [Accepted: 01/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/02/2022] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer is the leading cause of death in the world among women. The Spanish National Health System (SNHS) introduced population-based breast cancer screening in 2006. As in most European programs, risk is identified on the basis of age and a mammogram is offered every two years to women aged 50-69 years. Scientific evidence is moving toward personalized screening, based on individual risk. This article presents the clinical trials that will evaluate the efficacy of personalized screening and some studies carried out in our environment on the effect of informing women of the benefits and adverse effects of screening or the acceptability and feasibility of offering personalized screening, in the Shared Decision Making context. The Preventive Activities and Health Promotion Program can help transform screening in our SNHS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Mercè Marzo-Castillejo
- Unitat de Suport a la Recerca Metropolitana Sud, IDIAP Jordi Gol, Direcció d'Atenció Primària Costa de Ponent, Institut Català de la Salut, Barcelona, España
| | | | | | - Maria José Hernández-Leal
- Departament d'Economia, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Reus, España; Centre de Recerca en Economia i Sostenibilitat (ECO-SOS), Tarragona, España; Grup de Recerca en Anàlisi Estadística i Econòmica en Salut (GRAEES), Lleida y Reus, España
| | - Montserrat Rué
- Grup de Recerca en Anàlisi Estadística i Econòmica en Salut (GRAEES), Lleida y Reus, España; Departament de Ciències Mèdiques Bàsiques, Universitat de Lleida - Institut de Recerca Biomèdica de Lleida (IRB Lleida), Lleida, España.
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Laza-Vásquez C, Codern-Bové N, Cardona-Cardona À, Hernández-Leal MJ, Pérez-Lacasta MJ, Carles-Lavila M, Rué M, on behalf of the DECIDO group. Views of health professionals on risk-based breast cancer screening and its implementation in the Spanish National Health System: A qualitative discussion group study. PLoS One 2022; 17:e0263788. [PMID: 35120169 PMCID: PMC8815913 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0263788] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/03/2021] [Accepted: 01/26/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND With the aim of increasing benefits and decreasing harms, risk-based breast cancer screening has been proposed as an alternative to age-based screening. This study explores barriers and facilitators to implementing a risk-based breast cancer screening program from the perspective of health professionals, in the context of a National Health Service. METHODS Socio-constructivist qualitative research carried out in Catalonia (Spain), in the year 2019. Four discussion groups were conducted, with a total of 29 health professionals from primary care, breast cancer screening programs, hospital breast units, epidemiology units, and clinical specialties. A descriptive-interpretive thematic analysis was performed. RESULTS Identified barriers included resistance to reducing the number of screening exams for low-risk women; resistance to change for health professionals; difficulties in risk communication; lack of conclusive evidence of the benefits of risk-based screening; limited economic resources; and organizational transformation. Facilitators include benefits of risk-based strategies for high and low-risk women; women's active role in their health care; proximity of women and primary care professionals; experience of health professionals in other screening programs; and greater efficiency of a risk-based screening program. Organizational and administrative changes in the health system, commitment by policy makers, training of health professionals, and educational interventions addressed to the general population will be required. CONCLUSIONS Despite the expressed difficulties, participants supported the implementation of risk-based screening. They highlighted its benefits, especially for women at high risk of breast cancer and those under 50 years of age, and assumed a greater efficiency of the risk-based program compared to the aged-based one. Future studies should assess the efficiency and feasibility of risk-based breast cancer screening for its transfer to clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Celmira Laza-Vásquez
- Department of Nursing and Physiotherapy, University of Lleida-IRBLleida, Lleida, Spain
- Health Care Research Group (GRECS), Lleida, Spain
| | - Núria Codern-Bové
- Escola Universitària d’Infermeria i Teràpia Ocupacional de Terrassa, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Terrassa, Spain
- Health, Participation, Occupation and Care Research Group (GrEUIT), Terrassa, Spain
- ÀreaQ, Evaluation and Qualitative Research, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Maria José Hernández-Leal
- Department of Economics and Research Centre on Economics and Sustainability (ECO-SOS), Rovira i Virgili University (URV), Tarragona, Spain
- Research Group in Statistical and Economic Analysis in Health (GRAEES), Reus, Spain
| | - Maria José Pérez-Lacasta
- Department of Economics and Research Centre on Economics and Sustainability (ECO-SOS), Rovira i Virgili University (URV), Tarragona, Spain
- Research Group in Statistical and Economic Analysis in Health (GRAEES), Reus, Spain
| | - Misericòrdia Carles-Lavila
- Department of Economics and Research Centre on Economics and Sustainability (ECO-SOS), Rovira i Virgili University (URV), Tarragona, Spain
- Research Group in Statistical and Economic Analysis in Health (GRAEES), Reus, Spain
| | - Montserrat Rué
- Department of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Lleida-IRBLleida, Lleida, Spain
- Research Group in Statistical and Economic Analysis in Health (GRAEES), Lleida, Spain
| | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Laza-Vásquez C, Hernández-Leal MJ, Carles-Lavila M, Pérez-Lacasta MJ, Cruz-Esteve I, Rué M, on behalf of the DECIDO Group. Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of a Personalized Breast Cancer Screening Program: Views of Spanish Health Professionals. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2022; 19:ijerph19031406. [PMID: 35162427 PMCID: PMC8835407 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19031406] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/20/2021] [Revised: 01/24/2022] [Accepted: 01/25/2022] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
This study explored the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a risk-based breast cancer screening program from the point of view of Spanish health professionals. A cross-sectional study with 220 Spanish health professionals was designed. Data were collected in 2020 via a web-based survey and included the advantages and disadvantages of risk-based screening and barriers and facilitators for the implementation of the program. Descriptive statistics and Likert scale responses analyzed as category-ordered data were obtained. The risk-based screening was considered important or very important to reduce breast cancer mortality and promote a more proactive role for women in breast cancer prevention, to increase coverage for women under 50 years, to promote a breast cancer prevention strategy for women at high risk, and to increase efficiency and effectiveness. Switching to a risk-based program from an age-based program was rated as important or very important by 85% of participants. As barriers for implementation, risk communication, the workload of health professionals, and limited human and financial resources were mentioned. Despite the barriers, there is good acceptance, and it seems feasible, from the perspective of health professionals, to implement a risk-based breast cancer screening program in Spain. However, this poses a number of organizational and resource challenges.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Celmira Laza-Vásquez
- Health Care Research Group (GRECS), Department of Nursing and Physiotherapy, University of Lleida-IRBLleida, 25198 Lleida, Spain;
| | - María José Hernández-Leal
- Research Centre on Economics and Sustainability (ECO-SOS), Department of Economics, Rovira i Virgili University (URV), 43003 Tarragona, Spain; (M.J.H.-L.); (M.C.-L.); (M.J.P.-L.)
- Research Group in Statistical and Economic Analysis in Health (GRAEES), 43204 Reus, Spain
| | - Misericòrdia Carles-Lavila
- Research Centre on Economics and Sustainability (ECO-SOS), Department of Economics, Rovira i Virgili University (URV), 43003 Tarragona, Spain; (M.J.H.-L.); (M.C.-L.); (M.J.P.-L.)
- Research Group in Statistical and Economic Analysis in Health (GRAEES), 43204 Reus, Spain
| | - Maria José Pérez-Lacasta
- Research Centre on Economics and Sustainability (ECO-SOS), Department of Economics, Rovira i Virgili University (URV), 43003 Tarragona, Spain; (M.J.H.-L.); (M.C.-L.); (M.J.P.-L.)
- Research Group in Statistical and Economic Analysis in Health (GRAEES), 43204 Reus, Spain
| | - Inés Cruz-Esteve
- Primer de Maig Basic Health Area, Catalan Health Institute (ICS), 25003 Lleida, Spain;
| | - Montserrat Rué
- Research Group in Statistical and Economic Analysis in Health (GRAEES), 43204 Reus, Spain
- Department of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Lleida-IRBLleida, 25198 Lleida, Spain
- Correspondence:
| | | |
Collapse
|
28
|
Lenkinski RE. Improving the Accuracy of Screening Dense Breasted Women for Breast Cancer By Combining Clinically Based Risk Assessment Models with Ultrasound Imaging. Acad Radiol 2022; 29 Suppl 1:S8-S9. [PMID: 34702674 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2021.09.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2021] [Accepted: 09/23/2021] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|
29
|
Mühlberger N, Sroczynski G, Gogollari A, Jahn B, Pashayan N, Steyerberg E, Widschwendter M, Siebert U. Cost effectiveness of breast cancer screening and prevention: a systematic review with a focus on risk-adapted strategies. THE EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS : HEPAC : HEALTH ECONOMICS IN PREVENTION AND CARE 2021; 22:1311-1344. [PMID: 34342797 DOI: 10.1007/s10198-021-01338-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2020] [Accepted: 06/10/2021] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Benefit and cost effectiveness of breast cancer screening are still matters of controversy. Risk-adapted strategies are proposed to improve its benefit-harm and cost-benefit relations. Our objective was to perform a systematic review on economic breast cancer models evaluating primary and secondary prevention strategies in the European health care setting, with specific focus on model results, model characteristics, and risk-adapted strategies. METHODS Literature databases were systematically searched for economic breast cancer models evaluating the cost effectiveness of breast cancer screening and prevention strategies in the European health care context. Characteristics, methodological details and results of the identified studies are reported in evidence tables. Economic model outputs are standardized to achieve comparable cost-effectiveness ratios. RESULTS Thirty-two economic evaluations of breast cancer screening and seven evaluations of primary breast cancer prevention were included. Five screening studies and none of the prevention studies considered risk-adapted strategies. Studies differed in methodologic features. Only about half of the screening studies modeled overdiagnosis-related harms, most often indirectly and without reporting their magnitude. All models predict gains in life expectancy and/or quality-adjusted life expectancy at acceptable costs. However, risk-adapted screening was shown to be more effective and efficient than conventional screening. CONCLUSIONS Economic models suggest that breast cancer screening and prevention are cost effective in the European setting. All screening models predict gains in life expectancy, which has not yet been confirmed by trials. European models evaluating risk-adapted screening strategies are rare, but suggest that risk-adapted screening is more effective and efficient than conventional screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nikolai Mühlberger
- Institute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, Department of Public Health, Health Services Research and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT-University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Eduard-Wallnoefer-Zentrum I, 6060, Hall i.T, Austria
| | - Gaby Sroczynski
- Institute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, Department of Public Health, Health Services Research and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT-University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Eduard-Wallnoefer-Zentrum I, 6060, Hall i.T, Austria
| | - Artemisa Gogollari
- Institute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, Department of Public Health, Health Services Research and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT-University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Eduard-Wallnoefer-Zentrum I, 6060, Hall i.T, Austria
| | - Beate Jahn
- Institute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, Department of Public Health, Health Services Research and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT-University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Eduard-Wallnoefer-Zentrum I, 6060, Hall i.T, Austria
| | - Nora Pashayan
- Institute of Epidemiology and Healthcare, Department of Applied Health Research, UCL-University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, UK
| | - Ewout Steyerberg
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, PO Box 9600, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Martin Widschwendter
- Department of Women's Cancer, EGA Institute for Women's Health, UCL - University College London, 74 Huntley St, Rm 340, London, WC1E 6AU, UK
| | - Uwe Siebert
- Institute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, Department of Public Health, Health Services Research and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT-University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Eduard-Wallnoefer-Zentrum I, 6060, Hall i.T, Austria.
- Division of Health Technology Assessment and Bioinformatics, ONCOTYROL - Center for Personalized Cancer Medicine, Innsbruck, Austria.
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Center for Health Decision Science, Boston, MA, USA.
- Harvard Medical School, Institute for Technology Assessment and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Marques CAV, Figueiredo END, Gutiérrez MGRD. Breast cancer screening program for risk groups: facts and perspectives. Rev Bras Enferm 2021; 75:e20210050. [PMID: 34669830 DOI: 10.1590/0034-7167-2021-0050] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2021] [Accepted: 06/22/2021] [Indexed: 12/09/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES to measure the frequency and compliance of breast cancer screening, according to the risk for this disease. METHODS a cross-sectional study with 950 female users of 38 public Primary Health Care services in São Paulo, between October and December 2013. According to UHS criteria, participants were grouped into high risk and standard risk, and frequency, association (p≤0.05), and screening compliance were measured. RESULTS 6.7% had high risk and 93.3% standard risk, respectively; in these groups, the frequency and compliance of clinical breast examination were 40.3% and 37.1%, and 43.5% and 43.0% (frequency p=0.631, compliance p=0.290). Mammograms were 67.7% and 35.5% for participants at high risk, and 57.4% and 25.4% for those at standard risk (frequency p=0.090, compliance p=0.000). CONCLUSIONS in the groups, attendance and conformity of the clinical breast exam were similar; for mammography, it was higher in those at high risk, with assertiveness lower than the 70% set in UHS.
Collapse
|
31
|
Lee E, Jung SY, Hwang HJ, Jung J. Patient-Level Cancer Prediction Models From a Nationwide Patient Cohort: Model Development and Validation. JMIR Med Inform 2021; 9:e29807. [PMID: 34459743 PMCID: PMC8438609 DOI: 10.2196/29807] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2021] [Revised: 07/07/2021] [Accepted: 07/26/2021] [Indexed: 01/14/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Nationwide population-based cohorts provide a new opportunity to build automated risk prediction models at the patient level, and claim data are one of the more useful resources to this end. To avoid unnecessary diagnostic intervention after cancer screening tests, patient-level prediction models should be developed. OBJECTIVE We aimed to develop cancer prediction models using nationwide claim databases with machine learning algorithms, which are explainable and easily applicable in real-world environments. METHODS As source data, we used the Korean National Insurance System Database. Every Korean in ≥40 years old undergoes a national health checkup every 2 years. We gathered all variables from the database including demographic information, basic laboratory values, anthropometric values, and previous medical history. We applied conventional logistic regression methods, light gradient boosting methods, neural networks, survival analysis, and one-class embedding classifier methods to effectively analyze high dimension data based on deep learning-based anomaly detection. Performance was measured with area under the curve and area under precision recall curve. We validated our models externally with a health checkup database from a tertiary hospital. RESULTS The one-class embedding classifier model received the highest area under the curve scores with values of 0.868, 0.849, 0.798, 0.746, 0.800, 0.749, and 0.790 for liver, lung, colorectal, pancreatic, gastric, breast, and cervical cancers, respectively. For area under precision recall curve, the light gradient boosting models had the highest score with values of 0.383, 0.401, 0.387, 0.300, 0.385, 0.357, and 0.296 for liver, lung, colorectal, pancreatic, gastric, breast, and cervical cancers, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Our results show that it is possible to easily develop applicable cancer prediction models with nationwide claim data using machine learning. The 7 models showed acceptable performances and explainability, and thus can be distributed easily in real-world environments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eunsaem Lee
- Department of Mathematics, Pohang University of Science and Technology, Pohang-si, Republic of Korea
| | - Se Young Jung
- Office of eHealth Research and Businesses, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam-si, Republic of Korea
| | - Hyung Ju Hwang
- Department of Mathematics, Pohang University of Science and Technology, Pohang-si, Republic of Korea
| | - Jaewoo Jung
- AMSquare Corporation, Pohang-si, Republic of Korea
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Maio F, Tari DU, Granata V, Fusco R, Grassi R, Petrillo A, Pinto F. Breast Cancer Screening during COVID-19 Emergency: Patients and Department Management in a Local Experience. J Pers Med 2021; 11:380. [PMID: 34066425 PMCID: PMC8148132 DOI: 10.3390/jpm11050380] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2021] [Revised: 04/30/2021] [Accepted: 05/04/2021] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND During the COVID-19 public health emergency, our breast cancer screening activities have been interrupted. In June 2020, they resumed, calling for mandatory safe procedures to properly manage patients and staff. METHODS A protocol supporting medical activities in breast cancer screening was created, based on six relevant articles published in the literature and in the following National and International guidelines for COVID-19 prevention. The patient population, consisting of both screening and breast ambulatory patients, was classified into one of four categories: 1. Non-COVID-19 patient; 2. Confirmed COVID-19 in an asymptomatic screening patient; 3. suspected COVID-19 in symptomatic or confirmed breast cancer; 4. Confirmed COVID-19 in symptomatic or confirmed breast cancer. The day before the radiological exam, patients are screened for COVID-19 infection through a telephone questionnaire. At a subsequent in person appointment, the body temperature is checked and depending on the clinical scenario at stake, the scenario-specific procedures for medical and paramedical staff are adopted. RESULTS In total, 203 mammograms, 76 breast ultrasound exams, 4 core needle biopsies, and 6 vacuum-assisted breast biopsies were performed in one month. Neither medical nor paramedical staff were infected on any of these occasions. CONCLUSION Our department organization model can represent a case of implementation of National and International guidelines applied in a breast cancer screening program, assisting hospital personnel into COVID-19 infection prevention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesca Maio
- Department of Radiology, Marcianise Hospital, Caserta Local Health Authority, Viale Sossietta Scialla, 81025 Marcianise, Italy; (F.M.); (F.P.)
| | - Daniele Ugo Tari
- Department of Breast Radiology, Caserta Local Health Authority Dictrict 12, Viale Paul Harris 79, 81100 Caserta, Italy;
| | - Vincenza Granata
- Department of Radiology, Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione G.Pascale di Napoli, Via Mariano Semmola 53, 80131 Naples, Italy; (V.G.); (R.F.)
| | - Roberta Fusco
- Department of Radiology, Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione G.Pascale di Napoli, Via Mariano Semmola 53, 80131 Naples, Italy; (V.G.); (R.F.)
| | - Roberta Grassi
- Department of Radiology, Università degli Studi della Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, Piazza Miraglia, 80138 Naples, Italy;
| | - Antonella Petrillo
- Department of Radiology, Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione G.Pascale di Napoli, Via Mariano Semmola 53, 80131 Naples, Italy; (V.G.); (R.F.)
| | - Fabio Pinto
- Department of Radiology, Marcianise Hospital, Caserta Local Health Authority, Viale Sossietta Scialla, 81025 Marcianise, Italy; (F.M.); (F.P.)
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Khan SA, Hernandez-Villafuerte KV, Muchadeyi MT, Schlander M. Cost-effectiveness of risk-based breast cancer screening: A systematic review. Int J Cancer 2021; 149:790-810. [PMID: 33844853 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.33593] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/05/2020] [Revised: 03/09/2021] [Accepted: 03/23/2021] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
To analyse published evidence on the economic evaluation of risk-based screening (RBS), a full systematic literature review was conducted. After a quality appraisal, we compared the cost-effectiveness of risk-based strategies (low-risk, medium-risk and high-risk) with no screening and age-based screening. Studies were also analysed for modelling, risk stratification methods, input parameters, data sources and harms and benefits. The 10 modelling papers analysed were based on screening performance of film-based mammography (FBM) (three); digital mammography (DM) and FBM (two); DM alone (three); DM, ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (one) and DM and US (one). Seven studies did not include the cost of risk-stratification, and one did not consider the cost of diagnosis. Disutility was incorporated in only six studies (one for screening and five for diagnosis). None of the studies reported disutility of risk-stratification (being considered as high-risk). Risk-stratification methods varied from only breast density (BD) to the combination of familial risk, genetic susceptibility, lifestyle, previous biopsies, Jewish ancestry and reproductive history. Less or no screening in low-risk women and more frequent mammography screening in high-risk women was more cost-effective compared to no screening and age-based screening. High-risk women screened annually yielded a higher mortality rate reduction and more quality-adjusted life years at the expense of higher cost and false positives. RBS can be cost effective compared to the alternatives. However, heterogeneity among risk-stratification methods, input parameters, and weaknesses in the methodologies hinder the derivation of robust conclusions. Therefore, further studies are warranted to assess newer technologies and innovative risk-stratification methods.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shah Alam Khan
- Division of Health Economics, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | | | - Muchandifunga Trust Muchadeyi
- Division of Health Economics, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Michael Schlander
- Division of Health Economics, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Pons-Rodriguez A, Forné Izquierdo C, Vilaplana-Mayoral J, Cruz-Esteve I, Sánchez-López I, Reñé-Reñé M, Cazorla C, Hernández-Andreu M, Galindo-Ortego G, Llorens Gabandé M, Laza-Vásquez C, Balaguer-Llaquet P, Martínez-Alonso M, Rué M. Feasibility and acceptability of personalised breast cancer screening (DECIDO study): protocol of a single-arm proof-of-concept trial. BMJ Open 2020; 10:e044597. [PMID: 33361170 PMCID: PMC7759966 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044597] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Personalised cancer screening aims to improve benefits, reduce harms and being more cost-effective than age-based screening. The objective of the DECIDO study is to assess the acceptability and feasibility of offering risk-based personalised breast cancer screening and its integration in regular clinical practice in a National Health System setting. METHODS AND ANALYSIS The study is designed as a single-arm proof-of-concept trial. The study sample will include 385 women aged 40-50 years resident in a primary care health area in Spain. The study intervention consists of (1) a baseline visit; (2) breast cancer risk estimation; (3) a second visit for risk communication and screening recommendations based on breast cancer risk and (4) a follow-up to obtain the study outcomes.A polygenic risk score (PRS) will be constructed as a composite likelihood ratio of 83 single nucleotide polymorphisms. The Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium risk model, including age, race/ethnicity, family history of breast cancer, benign breast disease and breast density will be used to estimate a preliminary 5-year absolute risk of breast cancer. A Bayesian approach will be used to update this risk with the PRS value.The primary outcome measures will be attitude towards, intention to participate in and satisfaction with personalised breast cancer screening. Secondary outcomes will include the proportions of women who accept to participate and who complete the different phases of the study. The exact binomial and the Student's t-test will be used to obtain 95% CIs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION The study protocol was approved by the Drug Research Ethics Committee of the University Hospital Arnau de Vilanova. The trial will be conducted in compliance with this study protocol, the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice.The results will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and disseminated in scientific conferences and media. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT03791008.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Pons-Rodriguez
- Eixample Basic Health Area, Catalan Institute of Health, Lleida, Spain
- Health PhD Program, University of Lleida, Lleida, Spain
| | - Carles Forné Izquierdo
- Basic Medical Sciences, University of Lleida, Lleida, Spain
- Research Group on Statistics and Economic Evaluation in Health (GRAEES), University of Lleida, Lleida, Spain
| | | | - Inés Cruz-Esteve
- Primer de Maig Basic Health Area, Catalan Institute of Health, Lleida, Spain
| | | | - Mercè Reñé-Reñé
- Radiology Department, Arnau de Vilanova University Hospital, Lleida, Spain
| | - Cristina Cazorla
- Primer de Maig Basic Health Area, Catalan Institute of Health, Lleida, Spain
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Montserrat Martínez-Alonso
- Basic Medical Sciences, University of Lleida, Lleida, Spain
- Research Group on Statistics and Economic Evaluation in Health (GRAEES), University of Lleida, Lleida, Spain
- IRBLleida, Lleida, Spain
| | - Montserrat Rué
- Basic Medical Sciences, University of Lleida, Lleida, Spain
- Research Group on Statistics and Economic Evaluation in Health (GRAEES), University of Lleida, Lleida, Spain
- IRBLleida, Lleida, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Larsen M, Lilleborge M, Vigeland E, Hofvind S. Self-reported symptoms among participants in a population-based screening program. Breast 2020; 54:56-61. [PMID: 32927237 PMCID: PMC7495098 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2020.08.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/12/2020] [Revised: 08/21/2020] [Accepted: 08/24/2020] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND A limited number of studies have explored the association between self-reported symptoms and the risk of breast cancer among participants of population based screening programs. METHODS We performed descriptive statistics on recall, screen-detected and interval cancer, positive predictive value and histopathological tumour characteristics by symptom group (asymptomatic, lump, and skin or nipple changes) as reported from 785,642 women aged 50-69 when they attended BreastScreen Norway 1996-2016. Uni- and multivariable mixed effects logistic regression models were used to analyze the association between symptom group and screen-detected or interval cancer. Results were presented as odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS A lump or skin/nipple change was reported in 6.2% of the 3,307,697 examinations. The rate of screen-detected cancers per 1000 examinations was 45.2 among women with a self-reported lump and 5.1 among asymptomatic women. Adjusted odds ratio of screen-detected cancer was 10.1 (95% CI: 9.3-11.1) and 2.0 (95% CI: 1.6-2.5) for interval cancer among women with a self-reported lump versus asymptomatic women. Tumour diameter, histologic grade and lymph node involvement of screen-detected and interval cancer were less prognostically favourable for women with a self-reported lump versus asymptomatic women. CONCLUSION Despite targeting asymptomatic women, 6.2% of the screening examinations in BreastScreen Norway was performed among women who reported a lump or skin/nipple change when they attended screening. The odds ratio of screen-detected cancer was higher for women with versus without symptoms. Standardized follow-up guidelines might be beneficial for screening programs in order to take care of women reporting signs or symptoms of breast cancer when they attend screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marthe Larsen
- Section for Breast Cancer Screening, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway
| | - Marie Lilleborge
- Section for Breast Cancer Screening, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway
| | - Einar Vigeland
- Department of Radiology, Vestfold Hospital, Tønsberg, Norway
| | - Solveig Hofvind
- Section for Breast Cancer Screening, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway; Faculty of Health Sciences, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway.
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Vanni G, Pellicciaro M, Materazzo M, Bruno V, Oldani C, Pistolese CA, Buonomo C, Caspi J, Gualtieri P, Chiaravalloti A, Palombi L, Piccione E, Buonomo OC. Lockdown of Breast Cancer Screening for COVID-19: Possible Scenario. In Vivo 2020; 34:3047-3053. [PMID: 32871851 DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12139] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2020] [Revised: 06/16/2020] [Accepted: 06/18/2020] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM Coronavirus disease is spreading worldwide. Due to fast transmission and high fatality rate drastic emergency restrictions were issued. During the lockdown, only urgent medical services are guaranteed. All non-urgent services, as breast cancer (BC) screening, are temporarily suspended. The potential of breast cancer screening programs in increasing the survival rate and decreasing the mortality rate has been widely confirmed. Suspension could lead to worse outcomes for breast cancer patients. Our study aimed to analyse the data and provide estimates regarding the temporary BC screening suspension. PATIENTS AND METHODS Data regarding breast cancer and respective screening programs were achieved through literature research and analysis. RESULTS Considering three different scenarios with respect to the lockdown's impact on breast cancer screening, we estimate that approximately 10,000 patients could have a missed diagnosis during these 3 months. Considering a 6-month period, as suggested by the Imperial college model, the number of patients who will not receive a diagnosis will rise to 16,000. CONCLUSION Breast cancer screening should be resumed as soon as possible in order to avoid further breast cancer missed diagnosis and reduce the impact of delayed diagnosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gianluca Vanni
- Breast Unit, Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Marco Pellicciaro
- Breast Unit, Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Marco Materazzo
- Breast Unit, Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Valentina Bruno
- Section of Gynecology, Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Chiara Oldani
- Department of Economics and Engineering, University of Viterbo 'La Tuscia', Viterbo, Italy
| | - Chiara Adriana Pistolese
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Interventional Radiology, Molecular Imaging and Radiotherapy Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Chiara Buonomo
- Department of Emergency and Admission, Critical Care Medicine, Pain Medicine and Anesthetic Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Jonathan Caspi
- Breast Unit, Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Paola Gualtieri
- Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Agostino Chiaravalloti
- Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy.,IRCCS Neuromed, UOC Medicina Nucleare, Pozzilli, Italy
| | - Leonardo Palombi
- Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Emilio Piccione
- Section of Gynecology, Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Oreste Claudio Buonomo
- Breast Unit, Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Vilmun BM, Vejborg I, Lynge E, Lillholm M, Nielsen M, Nielsen MB, Carlsen JF. Impact of adding breast density to breast cancer risk models: A systematic review. Eur J Radiol 2020; 127:109019. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2020] [Revised: 04/10/2020] [Accepted: 04/13/2020] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
|