RESUMO
Phylogenomics allows us to uncover the historical signal of evolutionary processes through time and estimate phylogenetic networks accounting for these signals. Insight from genome-wide data further allows us to pinpoint the contributions to phylogenetic signal from hybridization, introgression, and ancestral polymorphism across the genome. Here we focus on how these processes have contributed to phylogenetic discordance among rattlesnakes (genera Crotalus and Sistrurus), a group for which there are numerous conflicting phylogenetic hypotheses based on a diverse array of molecular datasets and analytical methods. We address the instability of the rattlesnake phylogeny using genomic data generated from transcriptomes sampled from nearly all known species. These genomic data, analyzed with coalescent and network-based approaches, reveal numerous instances of rapid speciation where individual gene trees conflict with the species tree. Moreover, the evolutionary history of rattlesnakes is dominated by incomplete speciation and frequent hybridization, both of which have likely influenced past interpretations of phylogeny. We present a new framework in which the evolutionary relationships of this group can only be understood in light of genome-wide data and network-based analytical methods. Our data suggest that network radiations, like seen within the rattlesnakes, can only be understood in a phylogenomic context, necessitating similar approaches in our attempts to understand evolutionary history in other rapidly radiating species.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: False-positive results on screening mammography may affect women's willingness to return for future screening. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between screening mammography results and the probability of subsequent screening. DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING: 177 facilities participating in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC). PATIENTS: 3 529 825 screening mammograms (3 184 482 true negatives and 345 343 false positives) performed from 2005 to 2017 among 1 053 672 women aged 40 to 73 years without a breast cancer diagnosis. MEASUREMENTS: Mammography results (true-negative result or false-positive recall with a recommendation for immediate additional imaging only, short-interval follow-up, or biopsy) from 1 or 2 screening mammograms. Absolute differences in the probability of returning for screening within 9 to 30 months of false-positive versus true-negative screening results were estimated, adjusting for race, ethnicity, age, time since last mammogram, BCSC registry, and clustering within women and facilities. RESULTS: Women were more likely to return after a true-negative result (76.9% [95% CI, 75.1% to 78.6%]) than after a false-positive recall for additional imaging only (adjusted absolute difference, -1.9 percentage points [CI, -3.1 to -0.7 percentage points]), short-interval follow-up (-15.9 percentage points [CI, -19.7 to -12.0 percentage points]), or biopsy (-10.0 percentage points [CI, -14.2 to -5.9 percentage points]). Asian and Hispanic/Latinx women had the largest decreases in the probability of returning after a false positive with a recommendation for short-interval follow-up (-20 to -25 percentage points) or biopsy (-13 to -14 percentage points) versus a true negative. Among women with 2 screening mammograms within 5 years, a false-positive result on the second was associated with a decreased probability of returning for a third regardless of the first screening result. LIMITATION: Women could receive care at non-BCSC facilities. CONCLUSION: Women were less likely to return to screening after false-positive mammography results, especially with recommendations for short-interval follow-up or biopsy, raising concerns about continued participation in routine screening among these women at increased breast cancer risk. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Cancer Institute.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To explore the ability of artificial intelligence (AI) to classify breast cancer by mammographic density in an organized screening program. MATERIALS AND METHOD: We included information about 99,489 examinations from 74,941 women who participated in BreastScreen Norway, 2013-2019. All examinations were analyzed with an AI system that assigned a malignancy risk score (AI score) from 1 (lowest) to 10 (highest) for each examination. Mammographic density was classified into Volpara density grade (VDG), VDG1-4; VDG1 indicated fatty and VDG4 extremely dense breasts. Screen-detected and interval cancers with an AI score of 1-10 were stratified by VDG. RESULTS: We found 10,406 (10.5% of the total) examinations to have an AI risk score of 10, of which 6.7% (704/10,406) was breast cancer. The cancers represented 89.7% (617/688) of the screen-detected and 44.6% (87/195) of the interval cancers. 20.3% (20,178/99,489) of the examinations were classified as VDG1 and 6.1% (6047/99,489) as VDG4. For screen-detected cancers, 84.0% (68/81, 95% CI, 74.1-91.2) had an AI score of 10 for VDG1, 88.9% (328/369, 95% CI, 85.2-91.9) for VDG2, 92.5% (185/200, 95% CI, 87.9-95.7) for VDG3, and 94.7% (36/38, 95% CI, 82.3-99.4) for VDG4. For interval cancers, the percentages with an AI score of 10 were 33.3% (3/9, 95% CI, 7.5-70.1) for VDG1 and 48.0% (12/25, 95% CI, 27.8-68.7) for VDG4. CONCLUSION: The tested AI system performed well according to cancer detection across all density categories, especially for extremely dense breasts. The highest proportion of screen-detected cancers with an AI score of 10 was observed for women classified as VDG4. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Our study demonstrates that AI can correctly classify the majority of screen-detected and about half of the interval breast cancers, regardless of breast density. KEY POINTS: ⢠Mammographic density is important to consider in the evaluation of artificial intelligence in mammographic screening. ⢠Given a threshold representing about 10% of those with the highest malignancy risk score by an AI system, we found an increasing percentage of cancers with increasing mammographic density. ⢠Artificial intelligence risk score and mammographic density combined may help triage examinations to reduce workload for radiologists.
RESUMO
The role of natural selection in the evolution of trait complexity can be characterized by testing hypothesized links between complex forms and their functions across species. Predatory venoms are composed of multiple proteins that collectively function to incapacitate prey. Venom complexity fluctuates over evolutionary timescales, with apparent increases and decreases in complexity, and yet the causes of this variation are unclear. We tested alternative hypotheses linking venom complexity and ecological sources of selection from diet in the largest clade of front-fanged venomous snakes in North America: the rattlesnakes, copperheads, cantils, and cottonmouths. We generated independent transcriptomic and proteomic measures of venom complexity and collated several natural history studies to quantify dietary variation. We then constructed genome-scale phylogenies for these snakes for comparative analyses. Strikingly, prey phylogenetic diversity was more strongly correlated to venom complexity than was overall prey species diversity, specifically implicating prey species' divergence, rather than the number of lineages alone, in the evolution of complexity. Prey phylogenetic diversity further predicted transcriptomic complexity of three of the four largest gene families in viper venom, showing that complexity evolution is a concerted response among many independent gene families. We suggest that the phylogenetic diversity of prey measures functionally relevant divergence in the targets of venom, a claim supported by sequence diversity in the coagulation cascade targets of venom. Our results support the general concept that the diversity of species in an ecological community is more important than their overall number in determining evolutionary patterns in predator trait complexity.
Assuntos
Crotalinae/genética , Dieta/tendências , Venenos de Serpentes/genética , Adaptação Biológica/genética , Animais , Crotalinae/metabolismo , Dieta/veterinária , Expressão Gênica/genética , América do Norte , Filogenia , Comportamento Predatório/fisiologia , Proteômica/métodos , Seleção Genética/genética , Venenos de Serpentes/metabolismo , Dente/metabolismo , Transcriptoma/genéticaRESUMO
Snake venom can vary both among and within species. While some groups of New World pitvipers-such as rattlesnakes-have been well studied, very little is known about the venom of montane pitvipers (Cerrophidion) found across the Mesoamerican highlands. Compared to most well-studied rattlesnakes, which are widely distributed, the isolated montane populations of Cerrophidion may facilitate unique evolutionary trajectories and venom differentiation. Here, we describe the venom gland transcriptomes for populations of C. petlalcalensis, C. tzotzilorum, and C. godmani from Mexico, and a single individual of C. sasai from Costa Rica. We explore gene expression variation in Cerrophidion and sequence evolution of toxins within C. godmani specifically. Cerrophidion venom gland transcriptomes are composed primarily of snake venom metalloproteinases, phospholipase A[Formula: see text]s (PLA[Formula: see text]s), and snake venom serine proteases. Cerrophidion petlalcalensis shows little intraspecific variation; however, C. godmani and C. tzotzilorum differ significantly between geographically isolated populations. Interestingly, intraspecific variation was mostly attributed to expression variation as we did not detect signals of selection within C. godmani toxins. Additionally, we found PLA[Formula: see text]-like myotoxins in all species except C. petlalcalensis, and crotoxin-like PLA[Formula: see text]s in the southern population of C. godmani. Our results demonstrate significant intraspecific venom variation within C. godmani and C. tzotzilorum. The toxins of C. godmani show little evidence of directional selection where variation in toxin sequence is consistent with evolution under a model of mutation-drift equilibrium. Cerrophidion godmani individuals from the southern population may exhibit neurotoxic venom activity given the presence of crotoxin-like PLA[Formula: see text]s; however, further research is required to confirm this hypothesis.
RESUMEN: El veneno de las serpientes puede variar entre y dentro de las especies. Mientras algunos grupos de viperidos del Nuevo Mundocomo las cascabeleshan sido bien estudiadas, muy poco se sabe acerca del veneno de las nauyacas de frío (Cerrophidion) que se encuentran en las zonas altas de Mesoamérica. Comparadas con las extensamente estudiadas cascabeles, que estan ampliamente distribuidas, las poblaciones de Cerrophidion, aisladas en montañas, pueden poseer trayectorias evolutivas y diferenciación en su veneno unicos. En el presente trabajo, describimos el transcriptoma de las glándulas de veneno de poblaciones de C. petlalcalensis, C. tzotzilorum, y C. godmani de México, y un individuo de C. sasai de Costa Rica. Exploramos la variación en la expresión de toxinas en Cerrophidion y la evolución en las secuencias geneticas en C. godmani específicamente. El transcriptoma de la glándula de veneno de Cerrophidion esta compuesto principalmente de Metaloproteinasas de Veneno de Serpiente, Fosfolipasas A[Formula: see text] (PLA[Formula: see text]s), y Serin Proteasas de Veneno de Serpiente. Cerrophidion petlalcalensis presenta poca variación intraespecífica; sin embargo, los transcriptomas de la glandula de veneno de C. godmani y C. tzotzilorum difieren significativamente entre poblaciones geográficamente aisladas. Curiosamente, la variación intraespecífica estuvo atribuida principalmente a la expresión de las toxinas ya que no encontramos señales de selección en las toxinas de C. godmani. Adicionalmente, encontramos miotoxinas similares a PLA[Formula: see text] en todas las especies excepto C. petlalcalensis, y PLA[Formula: see text]s similares a crotoxina en la población sureña de C. godmani. Nuestros resultados demuestran la presencia de variacion intraespecífica presente en el veneno de C. godmani y C. tzotzilorum. Las toxinas de Cerrophidion godmani muestran poca evidencia de selección direccional, y la variación en la secuencias de las toxinas es consistente con evolucion bajo un modelo de equilibrio de mutación-deriva. Algunos individuos de C. godmani de la población del sur potencialmente tienen un veneno neurotóxico dada la presencia de PLA[Formula: see text]s similares a la crotoxina, sin embargo, se necesita más evidencia para corroborar esta hipótesis.
Assuntos
Venenos de Crotalídeos , Crotalinae , Crotoxina , Viperidae , Humanos , Animais , Crotalinae/genética , Crotalinae/metabolismo , Viperidae/metabolismo , Crotoxina/metabolismo , Venenos de Crotalídeos/genética , Venenos de Crotalídeos/metabolismo , Venenos de Crotalídeos/toxicidade , Venenos de Serpentes/metabolismo , Poliésteres/metabolismoRESUMO
PURPOSE: Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) is a distinct histological subtype of breast cancer that can make early detection with mammography challenging. We compared imaging performance of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) to digital mammography (DM) for diagnoses of ILC, invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), and invasive mixed carcinoma (IMC) in a screening population. METHODS: We included screening exams (DM; n = 1,715,249 or DBT; n = 414,793) from 2011 to 2018 among 839,801 women in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Examinations were followed for one year to ascertain incident ILC, IDC, or IMC. We measured cancer detection rate (CDR) and interval invasive cancer rate/1000 screening examinations for each histological subtype and stratified by breast density and modality. We calculated relative risk (RR) for DM vs. DBT using log-binomial models to adjust for the propensity of receiving DBT vs. DM. RESULTS: Unadjusted CDR per 1000 mammograms of ILC overall was 0.33 (95%CI: 0.30-0.36) for DM; 0.45 (95%CI: 0.39-0.52) for DBT, and for women with dense breasts- 0.33 (95%CI: 0.29-0.37) for DM and 0.54 (95%CI: 0.43-0.66) for DBT. Similar results were noted for IDC and IMC. Adjusted models showed a significantly increased RR for cancer detection with DBT compared to DM among women with dense breasts for all three histologies (RR; 95%CI: ILC 1.53; 1.09-2.14, IDC 1.21; 1.02-1.44, IMC 1.76; 1.30-2.38), but no significant increase among women with non-dense breasts. CONCLUSION: DBT was associated with higher CDR for ILC, IDC, and IMC for women with dense breasts. Early detection of ILC with DBT may improve outcomes for this distinct clinical entity.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Carcinoma Ductal de Mama , Feminino , Humanos , Neoplasias da Mama/patologia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Mamografia/métodos , Densidade da Mama , Carcinoma Ductal de Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
Background Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) and abbreviated breast MRI (ABMRI) are emerging alternatives to standard MRI for supplemental breast cancer screening. Purpose To compare the diagnostic performance of CEM, ABMRI, and standard MRI. Materials and Methods This single-institution, prospective, blinded reader study included female participants referred for breast MRI from January 2018 to June 2021. CEM was performed within 14 days of standard MRI; ABMRI was produced from standard MRI images. Two readers independently interpreted each CEM and ABMRI after a washout period. Examination-level performance metrics calculated were recall rate, cancer detection, and false-positive biopsy recommendation rates per 1000 examinations and sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of biopsy recommendation. Bootstrap and permutation tests were used to calculate 95% CIs and compare modalities. Results Evaluated were 492 paired CEM and ABMRI interpretations from 246 participants (median age, 51 years; IQR, 43-61 years). On 49 MRI scans with lesions recommended for biopsy, nine lesions showed malignant pathology. No differences in ABMRI and standard MRI performance were identified. Compared with standard MRI, CEM demonstrated significantly lower recall rate (14.0% vs 22.8%; difference, -8.7%; 95% CI: -14.0, -3.5), lower false-positive biopsy recommendation rate per 1000 examinations (65.0 vs 162.6; difference, -97.6; 95% CI: -146.3, -50.8), and higher specificity (87.8% vs 80.2%; difference, 7.6%; 95% CI: 2.3, 13.1). Compared with standard MRI, CEM had significantly lower cancer detection rate (22.4 vs 36.6; difference, -14.2; 95% CI: -28.5, -2.0) and sensitivity (61.1% vs 100%; difference, -38.9%; 95% CI: -66.7, -12.5). The performance differences between CEM and ABMRI were similar to those observed between CEM and standard MRI. Conclusion ABMRI had comparable performance to standard MRI and may support more efficient MRI screening. CEM had lower recall and higher specificity compared with standard MRI or ABMRI, offset by lower cancer detection rate and sensitivity compared with standard MRI. These trade-offs warrant further consideration of patient population characteristics before widespread screening with CEM. Clinical trial registration no. NCT03517813 © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Chang in this issue.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias da Mama/patologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Mamografia/métodos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética/métodosRESUMO
Background It is important to establish screening mammography performance benchmarks for quality improvement efforts. Purpose To establish performance benchmarks for digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) screening and evaluate performance trends over time in U.S. community practice. Materials and Methods In this retrospective study, DBT screening examinations were collected from five Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) registries between 2011 and 2018. Performance measures included abnormal interpretation rate (AIR), cancer detection rate (CDR), sensitivity, specificity, and false-negative rate (FNR) and were calculated based on the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, fifth edition, and compared with concurrent BCSC DM screening examinations, previously published BCSC and National Mammography Database benchmarks, and expert opinion acceptable performance ranges. Benchmarks were derived from the distribution of performance measures across radiologists (n = 84 or n = 73 depending on metric) and were presented as percentiles. Results A total of 896 101 women undergoing 2 301 766 screening examinations (458 175 DBT examinations [median age, 58 years; age range, 18-111 years] and 1 843 591 DM examinations [median age, 58 years; age range, 18-109 years]) were included in this study. DBT screening performance measures were as follows: AIR, 8.3% (95% CI: 7.5, 9.3); CDR per 1000 screens, 5.8 (95% CI: 5.4, 6.1); sensitivity, 87.4% (95% CI: 85.2, 89.4); specificity, 92.2% (95% CI: 91.3, 93.0); and FNR per 1000 screens, 0.8 (95% CI: 0.7, 1.0). When compared with BCSC DM screening examinations from the same time period and previously published BCSC and National Mammography Database performance benchmarks, all performance measures were higher for DBT except sensitivity and FNR, which were similar to concurrent and prior DM performance measures. The following proportions of radiologists achieved acceptable performance ranges with DBT: 97.6% for CDR, 91.8% for sensitivity, 75.0% for AIR, and 74.0% for specificity. Conclusion In U.S. community practice, large proportions of radiologists met acceptable performance ranges for screening performance metrics with DBT. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Lee and Moy in this issue.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Mamografia , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adolescente , Adulto Jovem , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Mamografia/métodos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Estudos Retrospectivos , Benchmarking , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodosRESUMO
Background Prior cross-sectional studies have observed that breast cancer screening with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has a lower recall rate and higher cancer detection rate compared with digital mammography (DM). Purpose To evaluate breast cancer screening outcomes with DBT versus DM on successive screening rounds. Materials and Methods In this retrospective cohort study, data from 58 breast imaging facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium were collected. Analysis included women aged 40-79 years undergoing DBT or DM screening from 2011 to 2020. Absolute differences in screening outcomes by modality and screening round were estimated during the study period by using generalized estimating equations with marginal standardization to adjust for differences in women's risk characteristics across modality and round. Results A total of 523 485 DBT examinations (mean age of women, 58.7 years ± 9.7 [SD]) and 1 008 123 DM examinations (mean age, 58.4 years ± 9.8) among 504 863 women were evaluated. DBT and DM recall rates decreased with successive screening round, but absolute recall rates in each round were significantly lower with DBT versus DM (round 1 difference, -3.3% [95% CI: -4.6, -2.1] [P < .001]; round 2 difference, -1.8% [95% CI: -2.9, -0.7] [P = .003]; round 3 or above difference, -1.2% [95% CI: -2.4, -0.1] [P = .03]). DBT had significantly higher cancer detection (difference, 0.6 per 1000 examinations [95% CI: 0.2, 1.1]; P = .009) compared with DM only for round 3 and above. There were no significant differences in interval cancer rate (round 1 difference, 0.00 per 1000 examinations [95% CI: -0.24, 0.30] [P = .96]; round 2 or above difference, 0.04 [95% CI: -0.19, 0.31] [P = .76]) or total advanced cancer rate (round 1 difference, 0.00 per 1000 examinations [95% CI: -0.15, 0.19] [P = .94]; round 2 or above difference, -0.06 [95% CI: -0.18, 0.11] [P = .43]). Conclusion DBT had lower recall rates and could help detect more cancers than DM across three screening rounds, with no difference in interval or advanced cancer rates. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Skaane in this issue.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neoplasias da Mama/epidemiologia , Densidade da Mama , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estudos Transversais , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Mamografia/métodos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodosRESUMO
We measure the momentum density in a Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC) with dilute spin impurities after an expansion in the presence of interactions. We observe tails decaying as 1/k^{4} at large momentum k in the condensate and in the impurity cloud. These algebraic tails originate from the impurity-BEC interaction, but their amplitudes greatly exceed those expected from two-body contact interactions at equilibrium in the trap. Furthermore, in the absence of impurities, such algebraic tails are not found in the BEC density measured after the interaction-driven expansion. These results highlight the key role played by impurities when present, a possibility that had not been considered in our previous work [Chang et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 235303 (2016)PRLTAO0031-900710.1103/PhysRevLett.117.235303]. Our measurements suggest that these unexpected algebraic tails originate from the nontrivial dynamics of the expansion in the presence of impurity-bath interactions.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Breast cancer risk models guide screening and chemoprevention decisions, but the extent and effect of variability among models, particularly at the individual level, is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the accuracy and disagreement between commonly used risk models in categorizing individual women as average vs. high risk for developing invasive breast cancer. DESIGN: Comparison of three risk prediction models: Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (BCRAT), Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) model, and International Breast Intervention Study (IBIS) model. SUBJECTS: Women 40 to 74 years of age presenting for screening mammography at a multisite health system between 2011 and 2015, with 5-year follow-up for cancer outcome. MAIN MEASURES: Comparison of model discrimination and calibration at the population level and inter-model agreement for 5-year breast cancer risk at the individual level using two cutoffs (≥ 1.67% and ≥ 3.0%). KEY RESULTS: A total of 31,115 women were included. When using the ≥ 1.67% threshold, more than 21% of women were classified as high risk for developing breast cancer in the next 5 years by one model, but average risk by another model. When using the ≥ 3.0% threshold, more than 5% of women had disagreements in risk severity between models. Almost half of the women (46.6%) were classified as high risk by at least one of the three models (e.g., if all three models were applied) for the threshold of ≥ 1.67%, and 11.1% were classified as high risk for ≥ 3.0%. All three models had similar accuracy at the population level. CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer risk estimates for individual women vary substantially, depending on which risk assessment model is used. The choice of cutoff used to define high risk can lead to adverse effects for screening, preventive care, and quality of life for misidentified individuals. Clinicians need to be aware of the high false-positive and false-negative rates and variation between models when talking with patients.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Humanos , Feminino , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias da Mama/epidemiologia , Mamografia/efeitos adversos , Fatores de Risco , Qualidade de Vida , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Medição de RiscoRESUMO
Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is defined by the Kellogg Community Health Scholars Program as a collaborative process that equitably involves all partners in the research process and recognizes the unique strengths that each community member brings. The CBPR process begins with a research topic of importance to the community, with the goal of combining knowledge and action with social change to improve community health and eliminate health disparities. CBPR engages and empowers affected communities to collaborate in defining the research question; sharing the study design process; collecting, analyzing, and disseminating the data; and implementing solutions. A CBPR approach in radiology has several potential applications, including removing limitations to high-quality imaging, improving secondary prevention, identifying barriers to technology access, and increasing diversity in the research participation for clinical trials. The authors provide an overview with the definitions of CBPR, explain how to conduct CBPR, and illustrate its applications in radiology. Finally, the challenges of CBPR and useful resources are discussed in detail. ©RSNA, 2023 Quiz questions for this article are available in the supplemental material.
Assuntos
Pesquisa Participativa Baseada na Comunidade , Projetos de Pesquisa , Humanos , Pesquisa Participativa Baseada na Comunidade/métodos , RadiologistasRESUMO
PURPOSE: Preoperative breast MRI is used to evaluate for additional cancer and extent of disease for newly diagnosed breast cancer, yet benefits and harms of preoperative MRI are not well-documented. We examined whether preoperative MRI yields additional biopsy and cancer detection by extent of breast density. METHODS: We followed women in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium with an incident breast cancer diagnosed from 2005 to 2017. We quantified breast biopsies and cancers detected within 6 months of diagnosis by preoperative breast MRI receipt, overall and by breast density, accounting for MRI selection bias using inverse probability weighted logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 19,324 women with newly diagnosed breast cancer, 28% had preoperative MRI, 11% additional biopsy, and 5% additional cancer detected. Four times as many women with preoperative MRI underwent additional biopsy compared to women without MRI (22.6% v. 5.1%). Additional biopsy rates with preoperative MRI increased with increasing breast density (27.4% for extremely dense compared to 16.2% for almost entirely fatty breasts). Rates of additional cancer detection were almost four times higher for women with v. without MRI (9.9% v. 2.6%). Conditional on additional biopsy, age-adjusted rates of additional cancer detection were lowest among women with extremely dense breasts, regardless of imaging modality (with MRI: 35.0%; 95% CI 27.0-43.0%; without MRI: 45.1%; 95% CI 32.6-57.5%). CONCLUSION: For women with dense breasts, preoperative MRI was associated with much higher biopsy rates, without concomitant higher cancer detection. Preoperative MRI may be considered for some women, but selecting women based on breast density is not supported by evidence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02980848; registered 2017.
Assuntos
Densidade da Mama , Neoplasias da Mama , Biópsia , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias da Mama/cirurgia , Feminino , Humanos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , MamografiaRESUMO
Background Artificial intelligence (AI) has shown promising results for cancer detection with mammographic screening. However, evidence related to the use of AI in real screening settings remain sparse. Purpose To compare the performance of a commercially available AI system with routine, independent double reading with consensus as performed in a population-based screening program. Furthermore, the histopathologic characteristics of tumors with different AI scores were explored. Materials and Methods In this retrospective study, 122 969 screening examinations from 47 877 women performed at four screening units in BreastScreen Norway from October 2009 to December 2018 were included. The data set included 752 screen-detected cancers (6.1 per 1000 examinations) and 205 interval cancers (1.7 per 1000 examinations). Each examination had an AI score between 1 and 10, where 1 indicated low risk of breast cancer and 10 indicated high risk. Threshold 1, threshold 2, and threshold 3 were used to assess the performance of the AI system as a binary decision tool (selected vs not selected). Threshold 1 was set at an AI score of 10, threshold 2 was set to yield a selection rate similar to the consensus rate (8.8%), and threshold 3 was set to yield a selection rate similar to an average individual radiologist (5.8%). Descriptive statistics were used to summarize screening outcomes. Results A total of 653 of 752 screen-detected cancers (86.8%) and 92 of 205 interval cancers (44.9%) were given a score of 10 by the AI system (threshold 1). Using threshold 3, 80.1% of the screen-detected cancers (602 of 752) and 30.7% of the interval cancers (63 of 205) were selected. Screen-detected cancer with AI scores not selected using the thresholds had favorable histopathologic characteristics compared to those selected; opposite results were observed for interval cancer. Conclusion The proportion of screen-detected cancers not selected by the artificial intelligence (AI) system at the three evaluated thresholds was less than 20%. The overall performance of the AI system was promising according to cancer detection. © RSNA, 2022.
Assuntos
Inteligência Artificial , Neoplasias da Mama , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Mamografia/métodos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To analyze rates, odds ratios (OR), and characteristics of screen-detected and interval cancers after concordant and discordant initial interpretations and consensus in a population-based screening program. METHODS: Data were extracted from the Cancer Registry of Norway for 487,118 women who participated in BreastScreen Norway, 2006-2017, with 2 years of follow-up. All mammograms were independently interpreted by two radiologists, using a score from 1 (negative) to 5 (high suspicion of cancer). A score of 2+ by one of the two radiologists was defined as discordant and 2+ by both radiologists as concordant positive. Consensus was performed on all discordant and concordant positive, with decisions of recall for further assessment or dismiss. OR was estimated with logistic regression with 95% confidence interval (CI), and histopathological tumor characteristics were analyzed for screen-detected and interval cancer. RESULTS: Among screen-detected cancers, 23.0% (697/3024) had discordant scores, while 12.8% (117/911) of the interval cancers were dismissed at index screening. Adjusted OR was 2.4 (95% CI: 1.9-2.9) for interval cancer and 2.8 (95% CI: 2.5-3.2) for subsequent screen-detected cancer for women dismissed at consensus compared to women with concordant negative scores. We found 3.4% (4/117) of the interval cancers diagnosed after being dismissed to be DCIS, compared to 20.3% (12/59) of those with false-positive result after index screening. CONCLUSION: Twenty-three percent of the screen-detected cancers was scored negative by one of the two radiologists. A higher odds of interval and subsequent screen-detected cancer was observed among women dismissed at consensus compared to concordant negative scores. Our findings indicate a benefit of personalized follow-up. KEY POINTS: ⢠In this study of 487,118 women participating in a screening program using independent double reading with consensus, 23% screen-detected cancers were detected by only one of the two radiologists. ⢠The adjusted odds ratio for interval cancer was 2.4 (95% confidence interval: 1.9, 2.9) for cases dismissed at consensus using concordant negative interpretations as the reference. ⢠Interval cancers diagnosed after being dismissed at consensus or after concordant negative scores had clinically less favorable prognostic tumor characteristics compared to those diagnosed after false-positive results.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Mama/patologia , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias da Mama/epidemiologia , Neoplasias da Mama/patologia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Mamografia/métodos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodosRESUMO
Importance: Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) was developed with the expectation of improving cancer detection in women with dense breasts. Studies are needed to evaluate interval invasive and advanced breast cancer rates, intermediary outcomes related to breast cancer mortality, by breast density and breast cancer risk. Objective: To evaluate whether DBT screening is associated with a lower likelihood of interval invasive cancer and advanced breast cancer compared with digital mammography by extent of breast density and breast cancer risk. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cohort study of 504â¯427 women aged 40 to 79 years who underwent 1â¯003â¯900 screening digital mammography and 375â¯189 screening DBT examinations from 2011 through 2018 at 44 US Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) facilities with follow-up for cancer diagnoses through 2019 by linkage to state or regional cancer registries. Exposures: Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) breast density; BCSC 5-year breast cancer risk. Main Outcomes and Measures: Rates per 1000 examinations of interval invasive cancer within 12 months of screening mammography and advanced breast cancer (prognostic pathologic stage II or higher) within 12 months of screening mammography, both estimated with inverse probability weighting. Results: Among 504â¯427 women in the study population, the median age at time of mammography was 58 years (IQR, 50-65 years). Interval invasive cancer rates per 1000 examinations were not significantly different for DBT vs digital mammography (overall, 0.57 vs 0.61, respectively; difference, -0.04; 95% CI, -0.14 to 0.06; P = .43) or among all the 836â¯250 examinations with BCSC 5-year risk less than 1.67% (low to average-risk) or all the 413â¯061 examinations with BCSC 5-year risk of 1.67% or higher (high risk) across breast density categories. Advanced cancer rates were not significantly different for DBT vs digital mammography among women at low to average risk or at high risk with almost entirely fatty, scattered fibroglandular densities, or heterogeneously dense breasts. Advanced cancer rates per 1000 examinations were significantly lower for DBT vs digital mammography for the 3.6% of women with extremely dense breasts and at high risk of breast cancer (13â¯291 examinations in the DBT group and 31â¯300 in the digital mammography group; 0.27 vs 0.80 per 1000 examinations; difference, -0.53; 95% CI, -0.97 to -0.10) but not for women at low to average risk (10â¯611 examinations in the DBT group and 37â¯796 in the digital mammography group; 0.54 vs 0.42 per 1000 examinations; difference, 0.12; 95% CI, -0.09 to 0.32). Conclusions and Relevance: Screening with DBT vs digital mammography was not associated with a significant difference in risk of interval invasive cancer and was associated with a significantly lower risk of advanced breast cancer among the 3.6% of women with extremely dense breasts and at high risk of breast cancer. No significant difference was observed in the 96.4% of women with nondense breasts, heterogeneously dense breasts, or with extremely dense breasts not at high risk.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Mama , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Mamografia , Programas de Rastreamento , Adulto , Idoso , Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Mama/patologia , Densidade da Mama , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias da Mama/patologia , Estudos de Coortes , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Mamografia/métodos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Invasividade Neoplásica/diagnóstico por imagem , Invasividade Neoplásica/patologia , Risco , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
Background Prevalent digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has shown higher cancer detection rates and lower recall rates compared with those of digital mammography (DM). However, data are limited on rates and histopathologic tumor characteristics of interval and subsequent round screen-detected cancers for DBT. Purpose To follow women randomized to screening with DBT or DM and to investigate rates and tumor characteristics of interval and subsequent round screen-detected cancers. Materials and Methods To-Be is a randomized controlled trial comparing the outcome of DBT and DM in organized breast cancer screening. The trial included 28 749 women, with 22 306 women returning for subsequent DBT screening 2 years later (11 201 and 11 105 originally screened with DBT and DM, respectively). Differences in rates, means, and distribution of histopathologic tumor characteristics between women prevalently screened with DBT versus DM were evaluated with Z tests, t tests, and χ2 tests. Relative risk (RR) with 95% CIs was calculated for the cancer rates. Results Interval cancer rates were 1.4 per 1000 screens (20 of 14 380; 95% CI: 0.9, 2.1) for DBT versus 2.0 per 1000 screens (29 of 14 369; 95% CI: 1.4, 2.9; P = .20) for DM. The rates of subsequent round screen-detected cancer were 8.1 per 1000 (95% CI: 6.6, 10.0) for women originally screened with DBT and 9.1 per 1000 (95% CI: 7.4, 11.0; P = .43) for women screened with DM. The distribution of tumor characteristics did not differ between groups for either interval or subsequent screen-detected cancer. The RR of interval cancer was 0.69 (95% CI: 0.39, 1.22; P = .20) for DBT versus DM, whereas RR of subsequent screen-detected cancer for women prevalently screened with DBT versus DM was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.67, 1.19; P = .43). Conclusion Rates of interval or subsequent round screen-detected cancers and their tumor characteristics did not differ between women originally screened with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) versus digital mammography. The analysis suggests that the benefits of prevalent DBT screening did not come at the expense of worse downstream screening performance measures in a population-based screening program. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Taourel in this issue.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Mamografia/métodos , Idoso , Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Noruega , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Sensibilidade e EspecificidadeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine factors associated with receipt of screening mammography by insured women before breast cancer diagnosis, and subsequent outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using claims data from commercial and federal payers linked to a regional SEER registry, we identified women diagnosed with breast cancer from 2007 to 2017 and determined receipt of screening mammography within 1 year before diagnosis. We obtained patient and tumor characteristics from the SEER registry and assigned each woman a socioeconomic deprivation score based on residential address. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate associations of patient and tumor characteristics with late-stage disease and nonreceipt of mammography. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards models to identify predictors of subsequent mortality. RESULTS: Among 7,047 women, 69% (n=4,853) received screening mammography before breast cancer diagnosis. Compared with women who received mammography, those with no mammography had a higher proportion of late-stage disease (34% vs 10%) and higher 5-year mortality (18% vs 6%). In multivariable modeling, late-stage disease was most associated with nonreceipt of mammography (odds ratio [OR], 4.35; 95% CI, 3.80-4.98). The Cox model indicated that nonreceipt of mammography predicted increased risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 2.00; 95% CI, 1.64-2.43), independent of late-stage disease at diagnosis (HR, 5.00; 95% CI, 4.10-6.10), Charlson comorbidity index score ≥1 (HR, 2.75; 95% CI, 2.26-3.34), and negative estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor status (HR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.67-2.61). Nonreceipt of mammography was associated with younger age (40-49 vs 50-59 years; OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.45-1.96) and increased socioeconomic deprivation (OR, 1.05 per decile increase; 95% CI, 1.03-1.07). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of insured women diagnosed with breast cancer, nonreceipt of screening mammography was significantly associated with late-stage disease and mortality, suggesting that interventions to further increase uptake of screening mammography may improve breast cancer outcomes.
RESUMO
The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted breast cancer screening and diagnostic imaging in the United States. We sought to evaluate how medical facilities prioritized breast imaging services during periods of reduced capacity or upon re-opening after closures. In fall 2020, we surveyed 77 breast imaging facilities within the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium in the United States. The survey ascertained the pandemic's impact on clinical practices during March-September 2020. Nearly all facilities (97%) reported closing or operating at reduced capacity at some point during this period. All facilities were open by August 2020, though 14% were still operating at reduced capacity in September 2020. During periods of re-opening or reduced capacity, 93% of facilities reported prioritizing diagnostic breast imaging over breast cancer screening. For diagnostic imaging, facilities prioritized based on rescheduling canceled appointments (89%), specific indication for diagnostic imaging (89%), patient demand (84%), individual characteristics and risk factors (77%), and time since last imaging examination (72%). For screening mammography, facilities prioritized based on rescheduled cancelations (96%), patient demand (83%), individual characteristics and risk factors (73%), and time since last mammogram (71%). For biopsy services, more than 90% of facilities reported prioritization based on rescheduling of canceled exams, patient demand, patient characteristics and risk factors and level of suspicion on imaging. The observed patterns from this large and geographically diverse sample of facilities in the United States indicate that multiple factors were commonly used to prioritize breast imaging services during periods of reduced capacity.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , COVID-19 , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Feminino , Humanos , Mamografia , Programas de Rastreamento , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados UnidosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Established mammography screening performance metrics use the initial screening mammography assessment because they were developed for radiologist performance auditing, yet these metrics are frequently used to inform health policy and screening decision making. The authors have developed new performance metrics based on the final assessment that consider the entire screening episode, including diagnostic workup. METHODS: The authors used data from 2,512,577 screening episodes during 2005-2017 at 146 facilities in the United States participating in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Screening performance metrics based on the final assessment of the screening episode were compared with conventional metrics defined with the initial assessment. Results were also stratified by breast density and breast cancer risk. RESULTS: The cancer detection rates were similar for the final assessment (4.1 per 1000; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.8-4.3 per 1000) and the initial assessment (4.1 per 1000; 95% CI, 3.9-4.3 per 1000). The interval cancer rate was 12% higher when it was based on the final assessment (0.77 per 1000; 95% CI, 0.71-0.83 per 1000) versus the initial assessment (0.69 per 1000; 95% CI, 0.64-0.74 per 1000), and this resulted in a modest difference in sensitivity (84.1% [95% CI, 83.0%-85.1%] vs 85.7% [95% CI, 84.8%-86.6%], respectively). Absolute differences in the interval cancer rate between final and initial assessments increased with breast density and breast cancer risk (eg, a difference of 0.29 per 1000 for women with extremely dense breasts and a 5-year risk >2.49%). CONCLUSIONS: Established screening performance metrics underestimate the interval cancer rate of a mammography screening episode, particularly for women with dense breasts or an elevated breast cancer risk. Women, clinicians, policymakers, and researchers should use final-assessment performance metrics to support informed screening decisions.