Breast Imaging Patient Demographics at a Major Comprehensive Cancer Center Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disproportionately affected certain vulnerable communities. The purpose of our study was to determine how COVID-19 affected the socioeconomic demographics of breast imaging patients at a major comprehensive cancer center. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study compared female patients who underwent screening mammograms, diagnostic mammograms, breast ultrasound, or breast MRI during the following time periods: prepandemic (February 1, 2018, through February 29, 2020), acute pandemic (March 1, 2020, through June 30, 2020), subacute pandemic (August 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020), and chronic pandemic (January 1, 2021, through June 30, 2022). Statistics were performed using the generalized estimating equations approach. RESULTS: A total of 74,398 female patients (mean age, 55.6 ± 12.4 years) underwent 238,776 total breast imaging examinations. For screening mammograms, Hispanics represented 27.1% (9,197 of 33,960) of patients in the prepandemic time period compared with 16.7% (604 of 3,621) in the acute pandemic time period, 18.7% (1,835 of 9,830) in the subacute pandemic time period, and 24.3% (7,492 of 30,869) in the chronic pandemic time period (all P < .0001). Self-pay patients saw similar declines for screening mammograms during the same time periods: 21.7% (7,375 of 33,960), 7.9% (286 of 3,621), 9.5% (933 of 9,830), and 17.4% (5,357 of 30,869), respectively (all P < .0001, compared with the prepandemic time period). Similarly dramatic trends were not observed for race or other imaging examinations. DISCUSSION: At our cancer center, Hispanics and self-pay patients were disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Strategies to improve health inequities are needed.

Is contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) an alternative to MRI in assessing the response to primary systemic therapy of breast cancer?

PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the assessing radiological response to primary systemic therapy (PST). METHOD: Prospective study between February 2021 and October 2022. Women with breast cancer and indication of PST were enrolled. CEM and MRI were performed before and after PST, and the findings, including size and radiological response pattern, were compared with the size of the residual lesion measured in surgical specimens and its Miller-Payne classification (considered the gold standard). Two of four independent radiologists, with 2 years of CEM experience and 10 years of MRI experience, reviewed the images while being blinded to the results of the other technique. The agreement between measurements was evaluated using the Pearson correlation coefficient (r) and Lin's coefficient. RESULTS: Forty-eight women with breast cancer who required PST were enrolled in the study, with a mean age of 57.21 ± 10.14 years. A total of thirty-three participants (68.75 %) completed the study. The correlation between CEM and MRI measurements was high before PST (r: 0.97), and local staging was identical for 45 out of 48 patients. MRI demonstrated better accuracy in predicting residual tumor size than CEM, with Lin's coefficient 0.91 and 0.73, respectively. However, no significant differences were observed in predicting response to therapy. Both methods tended to overestimate the size and degree of response in our study, with mean overestimations of 2.87 mm in CEM and 0.51 mm in MRI. CONCLUSION: CEM was found to be as accurate as MRI in predicting response to PST, indicating its potential as an alternative imaging technique, but further research is necessary.

Molybdenum target mammography-based prediction model for metastasis of axillary sentinel lymph node in early-stage breast cancer.

Sentinel lymph node (SLN) status is closely related to axillary lymph node metastasis in breast cancer. However, SLN biopsy has certain limitations due to invasiveness and diagnostic efficiency. This study aimed to develop a model to predict the risk of axillary SLN metastasis in early-stage breast cancer based on mammography, a noninvasive, cost-effective, and potential complementary way. Herein, 649 patients with early-stage breast cancer (cT1-T2) who received SLN biopsy were assigned to the training cohort (n = 487) and the validation cohort (n = 162). A prediction model based on specific characteristics of tumor mass in mammography was developed and validated with R software. The performance of model was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic curve, calibration plot, and decision curve analysis. Tumor margins, spicular structures, calcification, and tumor size were independent predictors of SLN metastasis (all P < .05). A nomogram showed a satisfactory performance with an AUC of 0.829 (95% CI = 0.792-0.865) in the training cohort and an AUC of 0.825 (95% CI = 0.763-0.888) in validation cohort. The consistency between model-predicted results and actual observations showed great Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit (P = .104). Patients could benefit from clinical decisions guided by the present model within the threshold probabilities of 6% to 84%. The prediction model for axillary SLN metastasis showed satisfactory discrimination, calibration abilities, and wide clinical practicability. These findings suggest that our prediction model based on mammography characteristics is a reliable tool for predicting SLN metastasis in patients with early-stage breast cancer.

Longitudinal adherence to breast cancer surveillance following cancer genetic testing in an integrated health care system.

PURPOSE: Screening with mammography and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an important risk management strategy for individuals with inherited pathogenic variants (PVs) in genes associated with increased breast cancer risk. We describe longitudinal screening adherence in individuals who underwent cancer genetic testing as part of usual care in a vertically integrated health system. METHODS: We determined the proportion time covered (PTC) by annual mammography and breast MRI for individuals with PVs in TP53, BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, NF1, CHEK2, and ATM. We determined time covered by biennial mammography beginning at age 50 years for individuals who received negative results, uncertain results, or with PVs in genes without specific breast cancer screening recommendations. RESULTS: One hundred and forty individuals had PVs in TP53, BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, NF1, CHEK2, or ATM. Among these individuals, average PTC was 48% (range 0-99%) for annual screening mammography and 34% (range 0-100%) for annual breast MRI. Average PTC was highest for individuals with PVs in CHEK2 (N = 14) and lowest for individuals with PVs in TP53 (N = 3). Average PTC for biennial mammography (N = 1,027) was 49% (0-100%). CONCLUSION: Longitudinal screening adherence in individuals with PVs in breast cancer associated genes, as measured by the proportion of time covered, is low; adherence to annual breast MRI falls below that of annual mammography. Additional research should examine screening behavior in individuals with PVs in breast cancer associated genes with a goal of developing interventions to improve adherence to recommended risk management.

Predictors of nonadherence to breast cancer screening guidelines in a United States urban comprehensive cancer center.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to identify predictors of nonadherence to breast cancer screening guidelines in an urban screening clinic among high- and average-risk women in the United States. METHODS: We reviewed records of 6090 women who received ≥2 screening mammograms over 2 years at the Karmanos Cancer Institute to examine how breast cancer risk and breast density were associated with guideline-concordant screening. Incongruent screening was defined as receiving supplemental imaging between screening mammograms for average-risk women, and as not receiving recommended supplemental imaging for high-risk women. We used t-tests and chi-square tests to examine bivariate associations with guideline-congruent screening, and probit regression to regress guideline-congruence unto breast cancer risk, breast density, and their interaction, controlling for age and race. RESULTS: Incongruent screening was more likely among high- versus average-risk women (97.7% vs. 0.9%, p < 0.01). Among average-risk women, incongruent screening was more likely among those with dense versus nondense breasts (2.0% vs. 0.1%, p < 0.01). Among high-risk women, incongruent screening was more likely among those with nondense versus dense breasts (99.5% vs. 95.2%, p < 0.01). The significant main effects of density and high-risk on increased incongruent screening were qualified by a density by high-risk interaction, showing a weaker association between risk and incongruent screening among women with dense breasts (simple slope = 3.71, p < 0.01) versus nondense breasts (simple slope = 5.79, p < 0.01). Age and race were not associated with incongruent screening. CONCLUSIONS: Lack of adherence to evidence-based screening guidelines has led to underutilization of supplementary imaging for high-risk women and potential overutilization for women with dense breasts without other risk factors.

Towards a biomechanical breast model to simulate and investigate breast compression and its effects in mammography and tomosynthesis.

Objective. In mammography, breast compression forms an essential part of the examination and is achieved by lowering a compression paddle on the breast. Compression force is mainly used as parameter to estimate the degree of compression. As the force does not consider variations of breast size or tissue composition, over- and undercompression are a frequent result. This causes a highly varying perception of discomfort or even pain in the case of overcompression during the procedure. To develop a holistic, patient specific workflow, as a first step, breast compression needs to be thoroughly understood. The aim is to develop a biomechanical finite element breast model that accurately replicates breast compression in mammography and tomosynthesis and allows in-depth investigation. The current work focuses thereby, as a first step, to replicate especially the correct breast thickness under compression.Approach. A dedicated method for acquiring ground truth data of uncompressed and compressed breasts within magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is introduced and transferred to the compression within x-ray mammography. Additionally, we created a simulation framework where individual breast models were generated based on MR images.Main results. By fitting the finite element model to the results of the ground truth images, a universal set of material parameters for fat and fibroglandular tissue could be determined. Overall, the breast models showed high agreement in compression thickness with a deviation of less than ten percent from the ground truth.Significance. The introduced breast models show a huge potential for a better understanding of the breast compression process.

Value of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in combination with mammography for screening early-stage breast cancer.

Objective: To study the value of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) in combination with mammography for screening early-stage breast cancer. Methods: Ninety-three female patients visiting Zhejiang Zhuji Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine from January 2020 to March 2022 were enrolled to receive DCE-MRI and mammography. The diagnostic efficiencies of different methods were assessed with pathological diagnosis as the golden standard. The factors affecting diagnostic sensitivity were investigated based on clinicopathological characteristics. Results: Forty-one patients were diagnosed as malignant pathological changes by DCE-MRI, and the signs were unclear boundary with surrounding tissues and irregular or unsmooth edges. The maximum linear slope and ratio of the maximum linear SlopeR of malignant pathological changes were significantly larger than those of benign pathological changes (P<0.05). Forty-five patients were diagnosed as malignant pathological changes by mammography combined with DCE-MRI. Compared to single diagnosis method, the combined diagnosis had significantly increased sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value, and decreased rates of missed diagnosis and misdiagnosis (P<0.05). Lesion diameter was an independent risk factor affecting the diagnostic sensitivity (P<0.05). Conclusion: Mammography and DCE-MRI play key roles in the early diagnosis of breast cancer, and their combination can increase the diagnostic efficiency.

Contrast-enhanced Mammography versus Contrast-enhanced Breast MRI: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) is a more accessible alternative to contrast-enhanced MRI (CE-MRI) in breast imaging, but a summary comparison of published studies is lacking. Purpose To directly compare the performance of CEM and CE-MRI regarding sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value in detecting breast cancer, involving all publicly available studies in the English language. Materials and Methods Two readers extracted characteristics of studies investigating the comparative diagnostic performance of CEM and CE-MRI in detecting breast cancer. Studies published until April 2021 were eligible. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive and negative likelihood ratios were calculated using bivariate random effects models. A Fagan nomogram was used to identify the maximum pretest probability at which posttest probabilities of a negative CEM or CE-MRI examination were in line with the 2% malignancy rate benchmark for downgrading a Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 4 to a BI-RADS category 3 result. I 2 statistics, Deeks funnel plot asymmetry test for publication bias, and meta-regression were used. Results Seven studies investigating 1137 lesions (654 malignant, 483 benign) with an average cancer prevalence of 65.3% (range: 47.3%-82.2%) were included. No publication bias was found (P = .57). While the positive likelihood ratio was equal at a value of 3.1 for CE-MRI and 3.6 for CEM, the negative likelihood ratio of CE-MRI (0.04) was lower than that with CEM (0.12). CE-MRI had higher sensitivity for breast cancer than CEM (97% [95% CI: 86, 99] vs 91% [95% CI: 77, 97], respectively; P < .001) but lower specificity (69% [95% CI: 46, 85] vs 74% [95% CI: 52, 89]; P = .09). A Fagan nomogram demonstrated that the maximum pretest probability at which both tests could rule out breast cancer was 33% for CE-MRI and 14% for CEM. Furthermore, iodine concentration was positively associated with CEM sensitivity and negatively associated with its specificity (P = .04 and P < .001, respectively). Conclusion Contrast-enhanced MRI had superior sensitivity and negative likelihood ratios with higher pretest probabilities to rule out malignancy compared with contrast-enhanced mammography. © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Mann and Veldhuis in this issue.

Acceptability of a companion patient guide to support expert consensus guidelines on surveillance mammography in older breast cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: To support shared decision-making, patient-facing resources are needed to complement recently published guidelines on approaches for surveillance mammography in breast cancer survivors aged ≥ 75 or with < 10-year life expectancy. We created a patient guide to facilitate discussions about surveillance mammography in older breast cancer survivors. METHODS: The "Are Mammograms Still Right for Me?" guide estimates future ipsilateral and contralateral breast (in-breast) cancer risks, general health, and the potential benefits/harms of mammography, with prompts for discussion. We conducted in-clinic acceptability testing of the guide by survivors and their clinicians at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center, including two community practices. Patients and clinicians received the guide ahead of a clinic visit and surveyed patients (pre-/post-visit) and clinicians (post-visit). Acceptability was defined as ≥ 75% of patients and clinicians reporting that the guide (a) should be recommended to others, (b) is clear, (c) is helpful, and (d) contains a suitable amount of information. We also elicited feedback on usability and mammography intentions. RESULTS: We enrolled 45 patients and their 21 clinicians. Among those responding in post-visit surveys, 33/37 (89%) patients and 15/16 (94%) clinicians would recommend the guide to others; 33/37 (89%) patients and 15/16 (94%) clinicians felt everything/most things were clear. All other pre-specified acceptability criteria were met. Most patients reported strong intentions for mammography (100% pre-visit, 98% post-visit). CONCLUSION: Oncology clinicians and older breast cancer survivors found a guide to inform mammography decision-making acceptable and clear. A multisite clinical trial is needed to assess the guide's impact mammography utilization. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov-NCT03865654, posted March 7, 2019.

Assessing Breast Cancer Risks to Improve Care for an Increased-Risk Population within Eastern North Carolina.

BACKGROUND The average lifetime risk of breast cancer for an American woman is 12.5%, but individual risks vary significantly. Risk modeling is a standard of care for breast cancer screening and prevention with recommended tools to stratify individual risks based on age, family history, breast density, and a host of other known risk factors. Because of a lack of resources rurally, we have not consistently met this standard of care within all of North Carolina.METHODS We implemented a quality improvement project to assess the risk for breast cancer by gathering data on community risks. We implemented an evidence-based tool (Tyrer-Cuzick) for quantifying risk within a mostly rural population of Eastern North Carolina and developed customized services for women meeting elevated-risk definition. These services included additional imaging for elevated-risk women and a risk-reduction program. We also assessed genetic risks for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in our at-risk population using National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines based on family history and added local genetics extenders to help test more women. We analyzed data regularly using Plan-Do-Study-Act methods to improve outcomes over 1 year.RESULTS We screened a population of 4500 women at a community hospital over a 1-year period for their individual lifetime cancer risk and genetic risk. Breast cancer risk was quantitated at the time of mammography, and women were stratified into 3 groups for risk management. Within our screening population, 6.3% of women were at high risk (defined by a lifetime breast cancer risk greater than or equal to 20%) and another 8.1% were above-average risk (defined by a lifetime breast cancer risk of 15%-20%). These women (14.4%) could potentially benefit from additional risk-management strategies. Additionally, 20% of all unaffected women within a typical screening population of Eastern North Carolina met NCCN guidelines for hereditary breast cancer and ovarian cancer testing independent of their cancer risk score. Using a model of targeted intervention within a population with elevated risks can be helpful in improving outcomes.LIMITATIONS This population within Eastern North Carolina is mostly rural and represents a potentially biased population, as it involves older women undergoing annual mammography. It may not be broadly applicable to the entire population based on age, geography, and other risks.CONCLUSIONS This model for improving cancer risk assessment and testing at a small community hospital in Eastern North Carolina was successful and addressed a community need. We discovered a high rate of increased-risk women who can benefit from individualized risk management, and a higher percentage of women who potentially benefit from genetic testing. These higher cumulative risks may in part explain some of the disparities seen for breast-cancer-specific outcomes in some parts of the state.

Inclusion of the US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation for Mammography in State Comprehensive Cancer Control Plans in the US.

Importance: The recommendations for the age and frequency that women at average risk for breast cancer should undergo breast cancer mammography screening have been a matter of emotional, political, and scientific debate over the past decades. Multiple national organizations provide recommendations for breast cancer screening age and frequency. US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funding for state comprehensive cancer control (CCC) planning requires compliance with stated objectives for attaining goals. US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations on cancer prevention and control are currently used to require coverage of prevention services. Objectives: To evaluate the consistency of state CCC plan objectives compared with the most current (2016) USPSTF recommendations for the age and frequency that individuals should undergo mammography screening and to make recommendations for improvement of state CCC plans. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used a descriptive, point-in-time evaluation and was conducted from November 1, 2019, to June 30, 2021. In November 2019, the most recent CCC plans from 50 US states and the District of Columbia were downloaded from the CDC website. The recommended ages at which to begin and end mammography examinations and the frequency of mammography examinations were extracted from plan objectives. Main Outcomes and Measures: The recommendations found in CCC plan objectives regarding the ages at which to begin and end mammography examinations and the frequency of mammography examinations for women with average risk for breast cancer were compared with USPSTF recommendations. Results: Of the 51 CCC plans, 16 (31%) were consistent with all USPSTF recommendations for age and frequency that women at average risk should undergo mammography. Twenty-six plans (51%) were partially consistent with recommendations, and 9 plans (18%) were not consistent with any of the 3 guideline components. Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with the USPSTF recommendation, state CCC plans are not homogenous regarding the age and frequency that women at average risk for breast cancer should undergo mammography. This variation is partially due to differences in state-specific planning considerations and discretion, variations in recommendations among national organizations, and publication of plans prior to the most current USPSTF recommendation (2016). Specifying the concept that high-risk populations need different age and frequency of screening recommendations than the general population may reduce heterogeneity among plans.

Closing the Gap: A Comparison of Engagement Interventions to Achieve Equitable Breast Cancer Screening in Rural Illinois.

Mammography screening rates are typically lower in those with less economic advantage (EA). This study, conducted at an integrated health care system covering a mixed rurality population, assessed the ability of interventions (text messages linking to a Web microsite, digital health care workers, and a community health fair) to affect mammography screening rates and disparity in those rates among different EA populations. Payor type served as a proxy for greater (commercially insured) versus lower (Medicaid insured) EA. 4,342 subjects were included across the preintervention ("Pre") and postintervention ("Post") periods. Interventions were prospectively applied to all Medicaid subjects and randomly selected commercial subjects. Applying interventions only to lower EA subjects reversed the screening rate disparity (2.6% Pre vs. -3.7% Post, odds ratio [OR] 2.4 P < 0.01). When intervention arms ("Least," "More," "Most") were equally applied, screening rates in both EA groups significantly increased in the More arm (Medicaid OR = 2.04 P = 0.04, Commercial OR = 3.08 P < 0.01) and Most arm (Medicaid OR 2.57 P < 0.01, Commercial OR 2.33 P < 0.01), but not in the Least (text-only) arm (Medicaid OR 1.83 P = 0.11, Commercial OR 1.72 P = 0.09), although this text-only arm was inadequately powered to detect a difference. In summary, targeting interventions to those with lower EA reversed screening rate disparities, text messaging combined with other interventions improved screening rates in both groups, and future research is needed to determine whether interventions can simultaneously improve screening rates for all without worsening the disparity.

The Breast Cancer Screening and Timing of Breast MRI-Experience in a Genetic High-Risk Screening Clinic in a Comprehensive Cancer Center.

For women with genetic risk of breast cancer, the addition of screening breast MRI to mammography has become a standard. The order and interval of annual imaging can be variable among providers. To evaluate the clinical implications related to the timing, we conducted a chart review on a cohort of women (N = 276) with high-risk (BRCA1, BRCA2, CDH1, PTEN and TP53) and moderate high-risk (ATM and CHEK2) predisposition to breast cancer in a 48-month follow up. The estimated MRI detection rate in the entire group is 1.75% (18 per 1000 MRI tests). For the high-risk group, the estimated rate is 2.98% (30 per 1000 MRI tests). Many women discovered their genetic risk at an age much older (average age of the high-risk group was 48 years) than the age recommended to initiate enhanced screening (age 20 to 25 years). In total, 4 of the 11 primary breast cancers detected were identified by screening MRI within the first month after initial visit, which were not detected by previous mammography, suggesting the benefit of initiating MRI immediately after the discovery of genetic risk. Breast screening findings for women with Lynch syndrome and neurofibromatosis type 1 were also included in this report.

Breast cancer screening in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review and ethical appraisal.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the evidence and clinical outcomes of screening interventions and implementation trials in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and also appraise some ethical issues related to screening in the region through quantitative and qualitative narrative synthesis of the literature. METHODS: We searched Pubmed, OvidMEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science to identify studies published on breast cancer screening interventions and outcomes in SSA. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the frequency and proportions of extracted variables, and narrative syntheses was used to evaluate the clinical outcomes of the different screening modalities. The mixed methods appraisal tool was used to assess the quality of studies included in the review. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included, which consisted of 72,572 women in ten countries in SSA. 63% (8/15) of the included publications evaluated Clinical Breast Examination (CBE), 47% (7/15) evaluated mammography and 7% (1/15) evaluated ultrasound screening. The cancer detection rate was < 1/1000 to 3.3/1000 and 3.3/100 to 56/1000 for CBE and mammography screening respectively. There was a lot of heterogeneity in CBE methods, target age for screening and no clear documentation of screening interval. Cost-effective analyses showed that CBE screening linked to comprehensive cancer care is most cost effective. There was limited discussion of the ethics of screening, including the possible harms of screening in the absence of linkage to care. The gap between conducting good screening program and the appropriate follow-up with diagnosis and treatment remains one of the major challenges of screening in SSA. DISCUSSION: There is insufficient real-world data to support the systematic implementation of national breast cancer screening in SSA. Further research is needed to answer important questions about screening, and national and international partnerships are needed to ensure that appropriate diagnostic and treatment modalities are available to patients who screen positive.

Imaging, Paternalism and the Worried Patient: Rethinking Our Approach.

The Covid pandemic has taught many lessons, including the importance of mental health. The value of the radiologist in holistic patient care may be underestimated and underresearched. Barriers to the acceptance of imaging as an important component in reassurance may be rooted in old ideas minimizing the importance of mental health.

Investigating the predictors of breast cancer screening behaviors (breast self-examination, clinical examination or examination by physician/midwife and mammography) based on protection motivation theory (PMT) in women.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is one of the most common health problems worldwide. The mortality rate of this disease is due to the lack of knowledge about screening methods and late diagnosis of cancer. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to determine the predictors of breast cancer screening behaviors using protection motivation theory. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The conduction of study was cross-sectional and on 400 women aged 30-59 in Kashan. The data collection instrument was a researcher-made questionnaire based on protection motivation theory. Sampling was performed from all community health service centers in Kashan and the proportional to size sampling method was used as available sampling. The statistical tests were Pearson correlation and linear regression. The software used was version 22 SPSS and the significance level was 0.05. RESULTS: The results showed that the average age of women was 39.7 ± 7.9 years. There is a direct and statistically significant relationship between perceived breast cancer screening behaviors and perceived self-efficacy (P < 0.05) and there is an inverse statistically significant relationship between breast cancer screening behaviors and perceived cost (P < 0.05). There is also a direct and significant statistical relationship between motivation of protection and perceived sensitivity, intensity, self-efficacy, cost, and perceived response efficiency (P < 0.05). Perceived self-efficacy, cost, and response efficiency are the predictors of breast cancer screening behaviors. The perceived cost is the negative predictor. CONCLUSION: Overall, health care providers can view PMT as a framework for developing educational interventions aimed at improving behaviors related to breast cancer screening of women.

Coffee, Tea, and Mammographic Breast Density in Premenopausal Women.

Studies have investigated the associations of coffee and tea with mammographic breast density (MBD) in premenopausal women with inconsistent results. We analyzed data from 375 premenopausal women who attended a screening mammogram at Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO in 2016, and stratified the analyses by race (non-Hispanic White (NHW) vs. Black/African American). Participants self-reported the number of servings of coffee, caffeinated tea, and decaffeinated tea they consumed. Volpara software was used to determine volumetric percent density (VPD), dense volume (DV), and non-dense volume (NDV). We used generalized linear regression models to quantify the associations of coffee and tea intake with MBD measures. Coffee: ≥1 time/day (ß = 1.06; 95% CI = 0.93-1.21; p-trend = 0.61) and caffeinated tea: ≥1 time/day (ß = 1.01; 95% CI = 0.88-1.17; p-trend = 0.61) were not associated with VPD. Decaffeinated tea (≥1 time/week) was positively associated with VPD in NHW women (ß = 1.22; 95% CI = 1.06-1.39) but not in African American women (ß = 0.93; 95% CI = 0.73-1.17; p-interaction = 0.02). Coffee (≥1 time/day) was positively associated with DV in African American women (ß = 1.52; 95% CI = 1.11-2.07) but not in NHW women (ß = 1.10; 95% CI = 0.95-1.29; p-interaction = 0.02). Our findings do not support associations of coffee and caffeinated tea intake with VPD in premenopausal women. Positive associations of decaffeinated tea with VPD, with suggestions of effect modification by race, require confirmation in larger studies with diverse study populations.

Comparable prediction of breast cancer risk from a glimpse or a first impression of a mammogram.

Expert radiologists can discern normal from abnormal mammograms with above-chance accuracy after brief (e.g. 500 ms) exposure. They can even predict cancer risk viewing currently normal images (priors) from women who will later develop cancer. This involves a rapid, global, non-selective process called "gist extraction". It is not yet known whether prolonged exposure can strengthen the gist signal, or if it is available solely in the early exposure. This is of particular interest for the priors that do not contain any localizable signal of abnormality. The current study compared performance with brief (500 ms) or unlimited exposure for four types of mammograms (normal, abnormal, contralateral, priors). Groups of expert radiologists and untrained observers were tested. As expected, radiologists outperformed naïve participants. Replicating prior work, they exceeded chance performance though the gist signal was weak. However, we found no consistent performance differences in radiologists or naïves between timing conditions. Exposure time neither increased nor decreased ability to identify the gist of abnormality or predict cancer risk. If gist signals are to have a place in cancer risk assessments, more efforts should be made to strengthen the signal.

Mindfulness-based positive psychology interventions: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: There are hundreds of mindfulness-based interventions in the form of structured and unstructured therapies, trainings, and meditation programs, mostly utilized in a clinical rather than a well-being perspective. The number of empirical studies on positive potentials of mindfulness is comparatively less, and their known status in academia is ambiguous. Hence, the current paper aimed to review the studies where mindfulness-based interventions had integrated positive psychology variables, in order to produce positive functioning. METHODS: Data were obtained from the databases of PubMed, Scopus, and PsycNet and manual search in Google Scholar. From the 3831 articles, irrelevant or inaccessible studies were eliminated, reducing the number of final articles chosen for review to 21. Interventions that contribute to enhancement of eudaimonia, hedonia, and other positive variables are discussed. RESULTS: Findings include the potential positive qualities of MBIs in producing specific positive outcomes within limited circumstances, and ascendancy of hedonia and other positive variables over eudaimonic enhancement. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, exigency of modifications in the existing MBIs to bring about exclusively positive outcomes was identified, and observed the necessity of novel interventions for eudaimonic enhancement and elevation of hedonia in a comprehensive manner.