Digital vs screen-film mammography in population-based breast cancer screening: performance indicators and tumour characteristics of screen-detected and interval cancers.

BACKGROUND: Full-field digital mammography (FFDM) has replaced screen-film mammography (SFM) in most breast cancer screening programs due to technological advantages such as possibilities to adjust contrast, better image quality and transfer capabilities. This study describes the performance indicators during the transition from SFM to FFDM and the characteristics of screen-detected and interval cancers. METHODS: Data of the Dutch breast cancer screening program, region North from 2004 to 2010 were linked to The Netherlands Cancer Registry (N=902 868). Performance indicators and tumour characteristics of screen-detected and interval cancers were compared between FFDM and SFM. RESULTS: After initial screens, recall rates were 2.1% (SFM) and 3.0% (FFDM; P<0.001). The positive predictive values (PPV) were 25.6% (SFM) and 19.9% (FFDM; P=0.002). Detection rates were similar, as were all performance indicators after subsequent screens. Similar percentages of low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) were found for SFM and FFDM. Invasive cancers diagnosed after subsequent screens with FFDM were more often of high-grade (P=0.024) and ductal type (P=0.030). The incidence rates of interval cancers were similar for SFM and FFDM after initial (2.69/1000 vs 2.51/1000; P=0.787) and subsequent screens (2.30 vs 2.41; P=0.652), with similar tumour characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: FFDM resulted in similar rates of screen-detected and interval cancers, indicating that FFDM performs as well as SFM in a breast cancer screening program. No signs of an increase in low-grade DCIS (which might connote possible overdiagnosis) were seen. Nonetheless, after initial screening, which accounts for 12% of all screens, FFDM resulted in higher recall rate and lower PPV that requires attention.

Osteoarthritis of the knee: multicompartmental or compartmental disease?

OBJECTIVE: Knee OA has been conceptualized as a multicompartmental disease, as a compartmental disease or as a combination of these two disease processes. The aim of this study was to determine the associations between four radiographic features (joint space narrowing, osteophyte formation, sclerosis and cysts) across and within the three knee compartments (medial tibiofemoral, lateral tibiofemoral and patellofemoral compartment) in knee OA. METHODS: Data from the Amsterdam OA Cohort were used. In 298 patients diagnosed with knee OA, radiographic features were examined in three knee joint compartments. Radiographic features were scored according to standardized scoring methods. Factor analysis was used to examine associations between the four radiographic features across and within compartments. RESULTS: A bifactor model showed a general multicompartmental factor: 10 of 12 radiographic features across the entire joint were associated with the general factor. The bifactor model also showed three compartmental factors-one for each compartment: joint space narrowing, sclerosis and to a lesser extent osteophyte formation were associated with these compartmental factors. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest a multicompartmental disease process in the knee, characterized by associations among features across the entire joint, as well as compartmental disease processes in each knee compartment, characterized by associations among features within specific compartments. Longitudinal studies are needed to explore the possibility of the development from a compartmental disease to a multicompartmental disease and the impact of contributing factors on the development.

Attending the breast screening programme after breast cancer treatment: a population-based study.

INTRODUCTION: In the Netherlands, breast cancer patients are treated and followed at least 5 years after diagnosis. Furthermore, all women aged 50-74 are invited biennially for mammography by the nationwide screening programme. The relation between the outpatient follow-up (follow-up visits in the outpatient clinic for 5 years after treatment) and the screening programme is not well established and attending the screening programme as well as outpatient follow-up is considered undesirable. This study evaluates potential factors influencing women to attend the screening programme during their outpatient follow-up (overlap) and the (re-)attendance to the screening programme after 5 years of outpatient follow-up. METHODS: Data of breast cancer patients aged 50-74 years, treated for primary breast cancer between 1996 and 2007 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and linked to the National Breast Cancer Screening Programme in the Northern region. Cox regression analyses were used to study women (re-)attending the screening programme over time, possible overlap with the outpatient follow-up and factors influencing this. RESULTS: In total 11227 breast cancer patients were included, of whom 19% attended the screening programme after breast cancer treatment, 4.4% within 5 years and 15.4% after more than 5 years. Factors that independently influenced attendance within 5 years as well as more than 5 years after treatment were: interval tumours (HR 0.77; 95%CI 0.61-0.97 and HR 0.69; 95%CI 0.53-0.88, ref: screen-detected tumours), receiving adjuvant radiotherapy (HR 0.65; 95%CI 0.47-0.90 and HR 0.66; 95%CI 0.47-0.93; ref: none) and diagnosis of in situ tumours (HR 1.67; 95%CI 1.25-2.23 and HR 1.39; 95%CI 1.05-1.85; ref: stage I tumours). Non-screen related tumours (HR 0.41; 95%CI 0.29-0.58) and recent diagnosis (HR 0.89 per year; 95%CI 0.86-0.92) were only associated with attendance within 5 years after treatment. CONCLUSION: The interrelation between outpatient follow-up and screening should be improved to avoid overlap and low attendance to the screening programme after outpatient follow-up. Breast cancer patients should be informed that attending the screening programme during the outpatient follow-up is not necessary.

Biomechanical factors and physical examination findings in osteoarthritis of the knee: associations with tissue abnormalities assessed by conventional radiography and high-resolution 3.0 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to explore the associations between knee osteoarthritis (OA)-related tissue abnormalities assessed by conventional radiography (CR) and by high-resolution 3.0 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), as well as biomechanical factors and findings from physical examination in patients with knee OA. METHODS: This was an explorative cross-sectional study of 105 patients with knee OA. Index knees were imaged using CR and MRI. Multiple features from CR and MRI (cartilage, osteophytes, bone marrow lesions, effusion and synovitis) were related to biomechanical factors (quadriceps and hamstrings muscle strength, proprioceptive accuracy and varus-valgus laxity) and physical examination findings (bony tenderness, crepitus, bony enlargement and palpable warmth), using multivariable regression analyses. RESULTS: Quadriceps weakness was associated with cartilage integrity, effusion, synovitis (all detected by MRI) and CR-detected joint space narrowing. Knee joint laxity was associated with MRI-detected cartilage integrity, CR-detected joint space narrowing and osteophyte formation. Multiple tissue abnormalities including cartilage integrity, osteophytes and effusion, but only those detected by MRI, were found to be associated with physical examination findings such as crepitus. CONCLUSION: We observed clinically relevant findings, including a significant association between quadriceps weakness and both effusion and synovitis, detected by MRI. Inflammation was detected in over one-third of the participants, emphasizing the inflammatory component of OA and a possible important role for anti-inflammatory therapies in knee OA. In general, OA-related tissue abnormalities of the knee, even those detected by MRI, were found to be discordant with biomechanical and physical examination features.

Self-reported knee instability and activity limitations in patients with knee osteoarthritis: results of the Amsterdam osteoarthritis cohort.

The objective of this study was to evaluate whether self-reported knee instability is associated with activity limitations in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA), in addition to knee pain and muscle strength. A cohort of 248 patients diagnosed with knee OA was examined. Self-reported knee instability was defined as the perception of any episode of buckling, shifting, or giving way of the knee in the past 3 months. Knee pain was assessed using a numeric rating scale, and knee extensor and flexor strength were measured using an isokinetic dynamometer. Activity limitations were measured by using the Western Ontario and McMasters Universities Osteoarthritis Index physical function questionnaire, the timed Get Up and Go, and the timed stair climbing and three questionnaires evaluating walking, climbing stairs, and rising from a chair. Other potential determinants of activity limitations were also collected, including joint proprioception, joint laxity, age, sex, body mass index (BMI), disease duration, and radiographic disease severity. Regression analyses evaluated the effect of adding self-reported knee instability to knee pain and muscle strength, when examining associations with the activity limitations measures. Self-reported knee instability was common (65 %) in this cohort of patients with knee OA. Analyses revealed that self-reported knee instability is significantly associated with activity limitations, even after controlling for knee pain and muscle strength. Joint proprioception, joint laxity, age, sex, BMI, duration of complaints, and radiographic severity did not confound the associations. In conclusion, self-reported knee instability is associated with activity limitations in patients with knee OA, in addition to knee pain and muscle strength. Clinically, self-reported knee instability should be assessed in addition to knee pain and muscle strength.