RESUMEN
Purpose: Breast density is associated with the risk of developing cancer and can be automatically estimated using deep learning models from digital mammograms. Our aim is to evaluate the capacity and reliability of such models to predict density from low-dose mammograms taken to enable risk estimates for younger women. Approach: We trained deep learning models on standard-dose and simulated low-dose mammograms. The models were then tested on a mammography dataset with paired standard- and low-dose images. The effect of different factors (including age, density, and dose ratio) on the differences between predictions on standard and low doses is analyzed. Methods to improve performance are assessed, and factors that reduce the model quality are demonstrated. Results: We showed that, although many factors have no significant effect on the quality of low-dose density prediction, both density and breast area have an impact. The correlation between density predictions on low- and standard-dose images of breasts with the largest breast area is 0.985 (0.949 to 0.995), whereas that with the smallest is 0.882 (0.697 to 0.961). We also demonstrated that averaging across craniocaudal-mediolateral oblique (CC-MLO) images and across repeatedly trained models can improve predictive performance. Conclusions: Low-dose mammography can be used to produce density and risk estimates that are comparable to standard-dose images. Averaging across CC-MLO and model predictions should improve this performance. The model quality is reduced when making predictions on denser and smaller breasts.
RESUMEN
Purpose. To improve breast cancer risk prediction for young women, we have developed deep learning methods to estimate mammographic density from low dose mammograms taken at approximately 1/10th of the usual dose. We investigate the quality and reliability of the density scores produced on low dose mammograms focussing on how image resolution and levels of training affect the low dose predictions.Methods. Deep learning models are developed and tested, with two feature extraction methods and an end-to-end trained method, on five different resolutions of 15,290 standard dose and simulated low dose mammograms with known labels. The models are further tested on a dataset with 296 matching standard and real low dose images allowing performance on the low dose images to be ascertained.Results. Prediction quality on standard and simulated low dose images compared to labels is similar for all equivalent model training and image resolution versions. Increasing resolution results in improved performance of both feature extraction methods for standard and simulated low dose images, while the trained models show high performance across the resolutions. For the trained models the Spearman rank correlation coefficient between predictions of standard and low dose images at low resolution is 0.951 (0.937 to 0.960) and at the highest resolution 0.956 (0.942 to 0.965). If pairs of model predictions are averaged, similarity increases.Conclusions. Deep learning mammographic density predictions on low dose mammograms are highly correlated with standard dose equivalents for feature extraction and end-to-end approaches across multiple image resolutions. Deep learning models can reliably make high quality mammographic density predictions on low dose mammograms.
Asunto(s)
Densidad de la Mama , Neoplasias de la Mama , Aprendizaje Profundo , Mamografía , Dosis de Radiación , Humanos , Mamografía/métodos , Femenino , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Procesamiento de Imagen Asistido por Computador/métodos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Algoritmos , Interpretación de Imagen Radiográfica Asistida por Computador/métodosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Risk stratification as a routine part of the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) could provide a better balance of benefits and harms. We developed BC-Predict, to offer women when invited to the NHSBSP, which collects standard risk factor information; mammographic density; and in a sub-sample, a Polygenic Risk Score (PRS). METHODS: Risk prediction was estimated primarily from self-reported questionnaires and mammographic density using the Tyrer-Cuzick risk model. Women eligible for NHSBSP were recruited. BC-Predict produced risk feedback letters, inviting women at high risk (≥8% 10-year) or moderate risk (≥5-<8% 10-year) to have appointments to discuss prevention and additional screening. RESULTS: Overall uptake of BC-Predict in screening attendees was 16.9% with 2472 consenting to the study; 76.8% of those received risk feedback within the 8-week timeframe. Recruitment was 63.2% with an onsite recruiter and paper questionnaire compared to <10% with BC-Predict only (P < 0.0001). Risk appointment attendance was highest for those at high risk (40.6%); 77.5% of those opted for preventive medication. DISCUSSION: We have shown that a real-time offer of breast cancer risk information (including both mammographic density and PRS) is feasible and can be delivered in reasonable time, although uptake requires personal contact. Preventive medication uptake in women newly identified at high risk is high and could improve the cost-effectiveness of risk stratification. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04359420).
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Femenino , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Mamografía , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Densidad de la Mama , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
Purpose: Mammographic breast density is one of the strongest risk factors for cancer. Density assessed by radiologists using visual analogue scales has been shown to provide better risk predictions than other methods. Our purpose is to build automated models using deep learning and train on radiologist scores to make accurate and consistent predictions. Approach: We used a dataset of almost 160,000 mammograms, each with two independent density scores made by expert medical practitioners. We used two pretrained deep networks and adapted them to produce feature vectors, which were then used for both linear and nonlinear regression to make density predictions. We also simulated an "optimal method," which allowed us to compare the quality of our results with a simulated upper bound on performance. Results: Our deep learning method produced estimates with a root mean squared error (RMSE) of 8.79 ± 0.21 . The model estimates of cancer risk perform at a similar level to human experts, within uncertainty bounds. We made comparisons between different model variants and demonstrated the high level of consistency of the model predictions. Our modeled "optimal method" produced image predictions with a RMSE of between 7.98 and 8.90 for cranial caudal images. Conclusion: We demonstrated a deep learning framework based upon a transfer learning approach to make density estimates based on radiologists' visual scores. Our approach requires modest computational resources and has the potential to be trained with limited quantities of data.
RESUMEN
Purpose. High breast density is associated with reduced efficacy of mammographic screening and increased risk of developing breast cancer. Accurate and reliable automated density estimates can be used for direct risk prediction and passing density related information to further predictive models. Expert reader assessments of density show a strong relationship to cancer risk but also inter-reader variation. The effect of label variability on model performance is important when considering how to utilise automated methods for both research and clinical purposes.Methods. We utilise subsets of images with density labels from the same 13 readers and 12 reader pairs, and train a deep transfer learning model which is used to assess how label variability affects the mapping from representation to prediction. We then create two end-to-end models: one that is trained on averaged labels across the reader pairs and the second that is trained using individual reader scores, with a novel alteration to the objective function. The combination of these two end-to-end models allows us to investigate the effect of label variability on the model representation formed.Results. We show that the trained mappings from representations to labels are altered considerably by the variability of reader scores. Training on labels with distribution variation removed causes the Spearman rank correlation coefficients to rise from 0.751 ± 0.002 to either 0.815 ± 0.026 when averaging across readers or 0.844 ± 0.002 when averaging across images. However, when we train different models to investigate the representation effect we see little difference, with Spearman rank correlation coefficients of 0.846 ± 0.006 and 0.850 ± 0.006 showing no statistically significant difference in the quality of the model representation with regard to density prediction.Conclusions. We show that the mapping between representation and mammographic density prediction is significantly affected by label variability. However, the effect of the label variability on the model representation is limited.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Aprendizaje Profundo , Humanos , Femenino , Densidad de la Mama , Mamografía/métodos , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagenRESUMEN
PURPOSE: There is great promise in breast cancer risk stratification to target screening and prevention. It is unclear whether adding gene panels to other risk tools improves breast cancer risk stratification and adds discriminatory benefit on a population basis. METHODS: In total, 10,025 of 57,902 women aged 46 to 73 years in the Predicting Risk of Cancer at Screening study provided DNA samples. A case-control study was used to evaluate breast cancer risk assessment using polygenic risk scores (PRSs), cancer gene panel (n = 33), mammographic density (density residual [DR]), and risk factors collected using a self-completed 2-page questionnaire (Tyrer-Cuzick [TC] model version 8). In total, 525 cases and 1410 controls underwent gene panel testing and PRS calculation (18, 143, and/or 313 single-nucleotide polymorphisms [SNPs]). RESULTS: Actionable pathogenic variants (PGVs) in BRCA1/2 were found in 1.7% of cases and 0.55% of controls, and overall PGVs were found in 6.1% of cases and 1.3% of controls. A combined assessment of TC8-DR-SNP313 and gene panel provided the best risk stratification with 26.1% of controls and 9.7% of cases identified at <1.4% 10-year risk and 9.01% of controls and 23.3% of cases at ≥8% 10-year risk. Because actionable PGVs were uncommon, discrimination was identical with/without gene panel (with/without: area under the curve = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.64-0.70). Only 7 of 17 PGVs in cases resulted in actionable risk category change. Extended case (n = 644)-control (n = 1779) series with TC8-DR-SNP143 identified 18.9% of controls and only 6.4% of stage 2+ cases at <1.4% 10-year risk and 20.7% of controls and 47.9% of stage 2+ cases at ≥5% 10-year risk. CONCLUSION: Further studies and economic analysis will determine whether adding panels to PRS is a cost-effective strategy for risk stratification.
Asunto(s)
Densidad de la Mama , Neoplasias de la Mama , Densidad de la Mama/genética , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/genética , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Femenino , Predisposición Genética a la Enfermedad , Humanos , Polimorfismo de Nucleótido Simple/genética , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Mammographic density (MD) phenotypes, including percent density (PMD), area of dense tissue (DA), and area of non-dense tissue (NDA), are associated with breast cancer risk. Twin studies suggest that MD phenotypes are highly heritable. However, only a small proportion of their variance is explained by identified genetic variants. METHODS: We conducted a genome-wide association study, as well as a transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS), of age- and BMI-adjusted DA, NDA, and PMD in up to 27,900 European-ancestry women from the MODE/BCAC consortia. RESULTS: We identified 28 genome-wide significant loci for MD phenotypes, including nine novel signals (5q11.2, 5q14.1, 5q31.1, 5q33.3, 5q35.1, 7p11.2, 8q24.13, 12p11.2, 16q12.2). Further, 45% of all known breast cancer SNPs were associated with at least one MD phenotype at p < 0.05. TWAS further identified two novel genes (SHOX2 and CRISPLD2) whose genetically predicted expression was significantly associated with MD phenotypes. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provided novel insight into the genetic background of MD phenotypes, and further demonstrated their shared genetic basis with breast cancer.
Asunto(s)
Densidad de la Mama , Neoplasias de la Mama , Densidad de la Mama/genética , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/genética , Femenino , Predisposición Genética a la Enfermedad , Estudio de Asociación del Genoma Completo , Humanos , Fenotipo , Polimorfismo de Nucleótido Simple , TranscriptomaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to establish risk of breast cancer based on breast density among Saudi women and to compare cancer prediction using different breast density methods. METHODS: 1140 pseudonymised screening mammograms from Saudi females were retrospectively collected. Breast density was assessed using Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density categories and visual analogue scale (VAS) of 285 cases and 855 controls matched on age and body mass index. In a subset of 160 cases and 480 controls density was estimated by two automated methods, Volpara Density™ and predicted VAS (pVAS). Odds ratios (ORs) between the highest and second categories in BI-RADS and Volpara density grades, and highest vs lowest quartiles in VAS, pVAS and Volpara Density™, were estimated using conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: For BI-RADS, the OR was 6.69 (95% CI 2.79-16.06) in the highest vs second category and OR = 4.78 (95% CI 3.01-7.58) in the highest vs lowest quartile for VAS. In the subset, VAS was the strongest predictor OR = 7.54 (95% CI 3.86-14.74), followed by pVAS using raw images OR = 5.38 (95% CI 2.68-10.77) and Volpara Density ™ OR = 3.55, (95% CI 1.86-6.75) for highest vs lowest quartiles. The matched concordance index for VAS was 0.70 (95% CI 0.65-0.75) demonstrating better discrimination between cases and controls than all other methods. CONCLUSION: Increased mammographic density was strongly associated with risk of breast cancer among Saudi women. Radiologists' visual assessment of breast density is superior to automated methods. However, pVAS and Volpara Density ™ also significantly predicted breast cancer risk based on breast density. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Our study established an association between breast density and breast cancer in a Saudi population and compared the performance of automated methods. This provides a stepping-stone towards personalised screening using automated breast density methods.
Asunto(s)
Densidad de la Mama , Neoplasias de la Mama , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Femenino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Mamografía/métodos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Arabia SauditaRESUMEN
We compared accuracy for breast cancer (BC) risk stratification of a new fully automated system (DenSeeMammo-DSM) for breast density (BD) assessment to a non-inferiority threshold based on radiologists' visual assessment. Pooled analysis was performed on 14,267 2D mammograms collected from women aged 48-55 years who underwent BC screening within three studies: RETomo, Florence study and PROCAS. BD was expressed through clinical Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density classification. Women in BI-RADS D category had a 2.6 (95% CI 1.5-4.4) and a 3.6 (95% CI 1.4-9.3) times higher risk of incident and interval cancer, respectively, than women in the two lowest BD categories. The ability of DSM to predict risk of incident cancer was non-inferior to radiologists' visual assessment as both point estimate and lower bound of 95% CI (AUC 0.589; 95% CI 0.580-0.597) were above the predefined visual assessment threshold (AUC 0.571). AUC for interval (AUC 0.631; 95% CI 0.623-0.639) cancers was even higher. BD assessed with new fully automated method is positively associated with BC risk and is not inferior to radiologists' visual assessment. It is an even stronger marker of interval cancer, confirming an appreciable masking effect of BD that reduces mammography sensitivity.
Asunto(s)
Densidad de la Mama , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Procesamiento de Imagen Asistido por Computador/métodos , Mamografía/métodos , Interpretación de Imagen Radiográfica Asistida por Computador/métodos , Programas Informáticos , Adulto , Área Bajo la Curva , Automatización , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , RiesgoRESUMEN
We evaluated the association between short-term change in body mass index (BMI) and breast density during a 1 year weight-loss intervention (Manchester, UK). We included 65 premenopausal women (35-45 years, ≥7 kg adult weight gain, family history of breast cancer). BMI and breast density (semi-automated area-based, automated volume-based) were measured at baseline, 1 year, and 2 years after study entry (1 year post intervention). Cross-sectional (between-women) and short-term change (within-women) associations between BMI and breast density were measured using repeated-measures correlation coefficients and multivariable linear mixed models. BMI was positively correlated with dense volume between-women (r = 0.41, 95%CI: 0.17, 0.61), but less so within-women (r = 0.08, 95%CI: -0.16, 0.28). There was little association with dense area (between-women r = -0.12, 95%CI: -0.38, 0.16; within-women r = 0.01, 95%CI: -0.24, 0.25). BMI and breast fat were positively correlated (volume: between r = 0.77, 95%CI: 0.69, 0.84, within r = 0.58, 95%CI: 0.36, 0.75; area: between r = 0.74, 95%CI: 0.63, 0.82, within r = 0.45, 95%CI: 0.23, 0.63). Multivariable models reported similar associations. Exploratory analysis suggested associations between BMI gain from 20 years and density measures (standard deviation change per +5 kg/m2 BMI: dense area: +0.61 (95%CI: 0.12, 1.09); fat volume: -0.31 (95%CI: -0.62, 0.00)). Short-term BMI change is likely to be positively associated with breast fat, but we found little association with dense tissue, although power was limited by small sample size.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Follicular lymphoma (FL) prognosis is influenced by the composition of the tumour microenvironment. We tested an automated approach to quantitatively assess the phenotypic and spatial immune infiltrate diversity as a prognostic biomarker for FL patients. METHODS: Diagnostic biopsies were collected from 127 FL patients initially treated with rituximab-based therapy (52%), radiotherapy (28%), or active surveillance (20%). Tissue microarrays were constructed and stained using multiplex immunofluorescence (CD4, CD8, FOXP3, CD21, PD-1, CD68, and DAPI). Subsequently, sections underwent automated cell scoring and analysis of spatial interactions, defined as cells co-occurring within 30 µm. Shannon's entropy, a metric describing species biodiversity in ecological habitats, was applied to quantify immune infiltrate diversity of cell types and spatial interactions. Immune infiltrate diversity indices were tested in multivariable Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analysis for overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Increased diversity of cell types (HR = 0.19 95% CI 0.06-0.65, p = 0.008) and cell spatial interactions (HR = 0.39, 95% CI 0.20-0.75, p = 0.005) was associated with favourable OS, independent of the Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index. In the rituximab-treated subset, the favourable trend between diversity and PFS did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Multiplex immunofluorescence and Shannon's entropy can objectively quantify immune infiltrate diversity and generate prognostic information in FL. This automated approach warrants validation in additional FL cohorts, and its applicability as a pre-treatment biomarker to identify high-risk patients should be further explored. The multiplex image dataset generated by this study is shared publicly to encourage further research on the FL microenvironment.
Asunto(s)
Linfoma Folicular/inmunología , Linfoma Folicular/patología , Biomarcadores/metabolismo , Biomarcadores de Tumor/inmunología , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Técnica del Anticuerpo Fluorescente/métodos , Humanos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Linfocitos Infiltrantes de Tumor/efectos de los fármacos , Linfocitos Infiltrantes de Tumor/inmunología , Linfoma Folicular/tratamiento farmacológico , Masculino , Pronóstico , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Rituximab/uso terapéutico , Microambiente Tumoral/efectos de los fármacos , Microambiente Tumoral/inmunologíaRESUMEN
Clinics for women concerned about their family history of breast cancer are widely established. A Family History Clinic was set-up in Manchester, UK, in 1987 in a Breast Unit serving a population of 1.8 million. In this review, we report the outcome of risk assessment, screening and prevention strategies in the clinic and propose future approaches. Between 1987-2020, 14,311 women were referred, of whom 6.4% were from known gene families, 38.2% were at high risk (≥30% lifetime risk), 37.7% at moderate risk (17-29%), and 17.7% at an average/population risk who were discharged. A total of 4168 (29.1%) women were eligible for genetic testing and 736 carried pathogenic variants, predominantly in BRCA1 and BRCA2 but also other genes (5.1% of direct referrals). All women at high or moderate risk were offered annual mammographic screening between ages 30 and 40 years old: 646 cancers were detected in women at high and moderate risk (5.5%) with a detection rate of 5 per 1000 screens. Incident breast cancers were largely of good prognosis and resulted in a predicted survival advantage. All high/moderate-risk women were offered lifestyle prevention advice and 14-27% entered various lifestyle studies. From 1992-2003, women were offered entry into IBIS-I (tamoxifen) and IBIS-II (anastrozole) trials (12.5% of invitees joined). The NICE guidelines ratified the use of tamoxifen and raloxifene (2013) and subsequently anastrozole (2017) for prevention; 10.8% women took up the offer of such treatment between 2013-2020. Since 1994, 7164 eligible women at ≥25% lifetime risk of breast cancer were offered a discussion of risk-reducing breast surgery and 451 (6.2%) had surgery. New approaches in all aspects of the service are needed to build on these results.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: A decrease in breast density due to tamoxifen preventive therapy might indicate greater benefit from the drug. It is not known whether mammographic density continues to decline after 1 year of therapy, or whether measures of breast density change are sufficiently stable for personalised recommendations. METHODS: Mammographic density was measured annually over up to 5 years in premenopausal women with no previous diagnosis of breast cancer but at increased risk of breast cancer attending a family-history clinic in Manchester, UK (baseline 2010-2013). Tamoxifen (20 mg/day) for prevention was prescribed for up to 5 years in one group; the other group did not receive tamoxifen and were matched by age. Fully automatic methods were used on mammograms over the 5-year follow-up: three area-based measures (NN-VAS, Stratus, Densitas) and one volumetric (Volpara). Additionally, percentage breast density at baseline and first follow-up mammograms was measured visually. The size of density declines at the first follow-up mammogram and thereafter was estimated using a linear mixed model adjusted for age and body mass index. The stability of density change at 1 year was assessed by evaluating mean squared error loss from predictions based on individual or mean density change at 1 year. RESULTS: Analysis used mammograms from 126 healthy premenopausal women before and as they received tamoxifen for prevention (median age 42 years) and 172 matched controls (median age 41 years), with median 3 years follow-up. There was a strong correlation between percentage density measures used on the same mammogram in both the tamoxifen and no tamoxifen groups (all correlation coeficients > 0.8). Tamoxifen reduced mean breast density in year 1 by approximately 17-25% of the inter-quartile range of four automated percentage density measures at baseline, and from year 2, it decreased further by approximately 2-7% per year. Predicting change at 2 years using individual change at 1 year was approximately 60-300% worse than using mean change at 1year. CONCLUSIONS: All measures showed a consistent and large average tamoxifen-induced change in density over the first year, and a continued decline thereafter. However, these measures of density change at 1 year were not stable on an individual basis.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos Hormonales/uso terapéutico , Densidad de la Mama/efectos de los fármacos , Neoplasias de la Mama/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias de la Mama/prevención & control , Mamografía/métodos , Tamoxifeno/uso terapéutico , Adulto , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Predisposición Genética a la Enfermedad , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Premenopausia , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Salud de la MujerRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In principle, risk-stratification as a routine part of the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) should produce a better balance of benefits and harms. The main benefit is the offer of NICE-approved more frequent screening and/ or chemoprevention for women who are at increased risk, but are unaware of this. We have developed BC-Predict, to be offered to women when invited to NHSBSP which collects information on risk factors (self-reported information on family history and hormone-related factors via questionnaire; mammographic density; and in a sub-sample, Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms). BC-Predict produces risk feedback letters, inviting women at high risk (≥8% 10-year) or moderate risk (≥5 to < 8% 10-year) to have discussion of prevention and early detection options at Family History, Risk and Prevention Clinics. Despite the promise of systems such as BC-Predict, there are still too many uncertainties for a fully-powered definitive trial to be appropriate or ethical. The present research aims to identify these key uncertainties regarding the feasibility of integrating BC-Predict into the NHSBSP. Key objectives of the present research are to quantify important potential benefits and harms, and identify key drivers of the relative cost-effectiveness of embedding BC-Predict into NHSBSP. METHODS: A non-randomised fully counterbalanced study design will be used, to include approximately equal numbers of women offered NHSBSP (n = 18,700) and BC-Predict (n = 18,700) from selected screening sites (n = 7). In the initial 8-month time period, women eligible for NHSBSP will be offered BC-Predict in four screening sites. Three screening sites will offer women usual NHSBSP. In the following 8-months the study sites offering usual NHSBSP switch to BC-Predict and vice versa. Key potential benefits including uptake of risk consultations, chemoprevention and additional screening will be obtained for both groups. Key potential harms such as increased anxiety will be obtained via self-report questionnaires, with embedded qualitative process analysis. A decision-analytic model-based cost-effectiveness analysis will identify the key uncertainties underpinning the relative cost-effectiveness of embedding BC-Predict into NHSBSP. DISCUSSION: We will assess the feasibility of integrating BC-Predict into the NHSBSP, and identify the main uncertainties for a definitive evaluation of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of BC-Predict. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04359420).
Asunto(s)
Ansiedad/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Mama/prevención & control , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Adolescente , Adulto , Ansiedad/epidemiología , Ansiedad/etiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Mama/economía , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Niño , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/economía , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/psicología , Estudios de Factibilidad , Femenino , Implementación de Plan de Salud/economía , Implementación de Plan de Salud/organización & administración , Humanos , Tamizaje Masivo/economía , Tamizaje Masivo/organización & administración , Tamizaje Masivo/psicología , Anamnesis , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Evaluación de Programas y Proyectos de Salud , Medición de Riesgo/economía , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Autoinforme/estadística & datos numéricos , Medicina Estatal/economía , Medicina Estatal/organización & administración , Reino Unido/epidemiología , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
The editorial introduces the Special Section on Evaluation Methodologies for Clinical AI.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We tested the hypothesis that body mass index (BMI) aged 20 years modifies the association of adult weight gain and breast cancer risk. METHODS: We recruited women (aged 47-73 years) into the PROCAS (Predicting Risk Of Cancer At Screening; Manchester, UK: 2009-2013) Study. In 47,042 women, we determined BMI at baseline and (by recall) at age 20 years, and derived weight changes. We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for new breast cancer using Cox models and explored relationships between BMI aged 20 years, subsequent weight changes and breast cancer risk. RESULTS: With median follow-up of 5.6 years, 1142 breast cancers (post-menopausal at entry: 829) occurred. Among post-menopausal women at entry, BMI aged 20 years was inversely associated [HR per SD: 0.87 (95% CI: 0.79-0.95)], while absolute weight gain was associated with breast cancer [HR per SD:1.23 (95% CI: 1.14-1.32)]. For post-menopausal women who had a recall BMI aged 20 years <23.4 kg/m2 (75th percentile), absolute weight gain was associated with breast cancer [HR per SD: 1.31 (95% CIs: 1.21-1.42)], but there were no associations for women with a recall BMI aged 20 years of >23.4 kg/m2 (Pinteraction values <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Adult weight gain increased post-menopausal breast cancer risk only among women who were <23.4 kg/m2 aged 20 years.
Asunto(s)
Índice de Masa Corporal , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Obesidad/epidemiología , Aumento de Peso/fisiología , Adulto , Anciano , Mama/metabolismo , Mama/patología , Neoplasias de la Mama/complicaciones , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Obesidad/complicaciones , Obesidad/patología , Posmenopausia/fisiología , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Factores de Riesgo , Reino Unido/epidemiología , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Computer-aided detection (CAD) systems are used to aid readers interpreting screening mammograms. An expert reader searches the image initially unaided and then once again with the aid of CAD, which prompts automatically detected suspicious regions. This could lead to a "safety-net" effect, where the initial unaided search of the image is adversely affected by the fact that it is preliminary to an additional search with CAD and may, therefore, be less thorough. To investigate the existence of such an effect, we created a visual search experiment for nonexpert observers mirroring breast screening with CAD. Each observer searched 100 images for microcalcification clusters within synthetic images in both prompted (CAD) and unprompted (no-CAD) conditions. Fifty-two participants were recruited for the study, 48 of whom had their eye movements tracked in real-time; the other 4 participants could not be accurately calibrated, so only behavioral data were collected. In the CAD condition, before prompts were displayed, image coverage was significantly lower than coverage in the no-CAD condition ( t 47 = 5.29 , p < 0.0001 ). Observer sensitivity was significantly greater for targets marked by CAD than the same targets in the no-CAD condition ( t 51 = 6.56 , p < 0.001 ). For targets not marked by CAD, there was no significant difference in observer sensitivity in the CAD condition compared with the same targets in the no-CAD condition ( t 51 = 0.54 , p = 0.59 ). These results suggest that the initial search may be influenced by the subsequent availability of CAD; if so, cross-sectional CAD efficacy studies should account for the effect when estimating benefit.
RESUMEN
The incidence of breast cancer continues to increase worldwide. Population-based screening is available in many countries but may not be the most efficient use of resources, thus interest in risk-based/stratified screening has grown significantly in recent years. An important part of risk-based screening is the incorporation of mammographic density (MD) and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) into risk prediction models to be combined with classical risk factors. In this article, we discuss different measures of MD and risk prediction models that are available. Risk-stratified screening options including supplemental or alternative screening modalities including digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), automated ultrasound (ABUS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are discussed, as well as potential risk-based interventions (diet and lifestyle, chemoprevention and risk-reducing surgery). Furthermore, we look at risk feedback in practice and the cost-effectiveness and acceptability of risk-based screening, highlighting some of the current challenges.