Analysis of mammographic diagnostic errors in breast clinic.

Mammography is the gold standard for detection of early breast cancer and it is still the only diagnostic tool which shows reduction of the mortality from that. Despite that, there is a high chance of false negatives that can lead to diagnostic errors resulting in delays of treatment and worsening of prognosis. The aim of this study is to analyze the rate of false negative in mammography and assess the source of diagnostic errors. Two radiologists have retrospectively evaluated 500 mammograms performed between January 2008 and December 2011 in Breast Imaging Clinic. 250 patients (Group A) had been operated for breast cancer and 250 patients (Group B) were healthy woman submitted to mammography according to the guideline for early detection of breast cancer. In Group A, 138 patients (55.2 %) were true missed cancer, 61 had minimal sign (24.4 %) and 53 were false negative (FN) (20.4 %). The source of errors amongst the FN were in 42 % of cases due to perception, in 15 % to interpretation, in 10 % to subtle/unusual lesion characteristics, in 9 % error for satisfaction of search, in 7 % to inherent limitations of mammography, in 4 % to poor technique and 13 % for inadequate clinical management. The diagnostic errors in breast clinic services are not negligible. The largest number of FN results from perception errors, misinterpretation and inadequate clinical management. These can be related to factors such as inattention, fatigue or lack of experience. To reduce it, it is necessary to have a dedicated multidisciplinary staff and adequate equipment and workloads.

The kinetics of reduction of minimal residual disease impacts on duration of response and survival of patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

UNLABELLED: We assessed by multiparametric flow cytometry the levels of minimal residual disease (MRD) in 100 adult patients with acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) achieving complete remission after intensive chemotherapy. The aim of the study was to determine the optimal threshold, in terms of residual leukemic cells, and the time point of choice, that is, post-induction (post-Ind) or post-consolidation (post-Cons), able to better predict outcome. By applying the maximally selected log-rank statistics, the threshold discriminating MRD- from MRD+ cases was set at 3.5 x 10(-4) residual leukemic cells, a level that allowed the identification of distinct subgroups of patients, both at post-Ind and post-Cons time points. Post-Cons MRD- patients had a superior outcome in terms of relapse rate, overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) (P<0.001, for all comparisons), regardless of the MRD status after induction. In particular, patients entering MRD negativity only after consolidation showed the same outcome as those achieving early negativity after induction. Multivariate analysis, including karyotype, age, MDR1 phenotype, post-Ind and post-Cons MRD levels, indicated that the post-Cons MRD status independently affected relapse rate, OS and RFS (P<0.001, for all comparisons). IN CONCLUSION: (1) the threshold of 3.5 x 10(-4) is valid in discriminating risk categories in adult AML and (2) post-Cons MRD assessment is critical to predict disease outcome.