[French breast cancer screening: What's the place of artificial intelligence?] / Intelligence artificielle : Place dans le dépistage du cancer du sein en France.

This paper deals with the place in 2021 of artificial intelligence for screening of breast cancer in France et discusses of the different types of use and their performance in the literature (Standalone, Augmented radiologist, triage). Moreover, this paper will give an overview of the potential applications of AI in the future (Personalized screening, prediction of interval cancers).

[Second reading in breast cancer screening program: State of knowledge and future]. / Seconde lecture en dépistage organisé du cancer du sein. États des lieux et perspectives d'évolution.

Second reading is an important part of breast cancer organized screening program. Image quality control and detection of non-diagnosed cancer by first reader are the two goals of this process. In France, 6 % of all screening cancer are diagnosed by second reading, actually done on screen film. With the technologic evolution (Digital breast tomosynthesis, Artificial intelligence) and societal digitalization, this process need to evolve. After some report about organization and results for second reading in France and outside, current and future shortcomings, proposition from professionals involved in breast cancer screening are made to improve this public health program.

Breast cancer incidence: Decreasing trend in large tumours in women aged 50-74.

Objective A decrease in advanced breast cancer incidence is considered an early indicator of breast cancer mortality reduction in a screening programme. We describe trends in breast cancer incidence according to tumour size and age in three French administrative areas, where an organized screening programme was implemented during the 1990s. Methods Our study included all 28,092 invasive breast cancers diagnosed from 2000 to 2010 in women living in three areas (Hérault, Isère, Loire-Atlantique). Age, year of diagnosis, and size of tumour at diagnosis was provided by the three area cancer registries. Poisson regression models were fitted to estimate changes in incidence over time, after adjustment for age and administrative area. Results From 2000 to 2010, the incidence rate of large (tumour size >20 mm) breast cancer linearly decreased in women aged 50-74 (target age of the screening programme) from 108.4 to 84.1/100,000 (annual percent change = -1.9%, p < 0.001). No change in large breast cancer incidence rate was found in women aged 20-49, or older than 74. Conclusions A decreasing trend in incidence of large tumour size breast cancer in the target age of the screening programme is demonstrated for the first time in France. The overall 20.9% linear decrease over 11 years in these three areas is encouraging and should be closely monitored and extended to other areas of France, where the screening programme was generally implemented only in 2004.

Comparison of direct digital mammography, computed radiography, and film-screen in the French national breast cancer screening program.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article was to compare the performance of digital mammography using hardcopy image reading against film-screen mammography in a French national routine population-based screening program with a decentralized organization. The French context offered the opportunity to examine separately computed radiography and direct digital mammography performances in a large cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study includes 23,423 direct digital mammography, 73,320 computed radiography, and 65,514 film-screen mammography examinations performed by 123 facilities in Bouches du Rhône, France, for women 50-74 years old between 2008 and 2010. We compared abnormal mammography findings rate, cancer detection rate, and tumor characteristics among the technologies. RESULTS: Abnormal finding rates were higher for direct digital mammography (7.78% vs 6.11% for film-screen mammography and 5.34% for computed radiography), particularly in younger women and in denser breasts. Cancer detection rates were also higher for direct digital mammography (0.71% vs 0.66% for film-screen mammography and 0.55% for computed radiography). The contrast between detection rates was stronger for ductal carcinoma in situ. Breast density was the main factor explaining the differences in detection rates. For direct digital mammography only, the detection rate was clearly higher in dense breasts whatever the age (odds ratio, 2.20). Except for grade, no differences were recorded concerning tumor characteristics in which the proportion of high-grade tumors was larger for direct digital mammography for invasive and in situ tumors. CONCLUSION: Direct digital mammography has a higher detection rate than film-screen mammography in dense breasts and for tumors of high grade. This latter association warrants further study to measure the impact of technology on efficacy of screening. The data indicate that computed radiography detects fewer tumors than film-screen mammography in most instances.

[Breast cancer screening in France: an overview in 2009]. / Dépistage des cancers du sein en France: état des lieux en 2009.

French breast cancer screening programme achieved national coverage in 2004-2005, fifteen years after the first pilot programs. The new protocol published in 2001, 2 views per breast every two years allowed systematic clinical examination for women aged 50 to 74. Acceptance rate increased gradually and reached 52.5% in 2008; 65% of mammograms after age 50 are in organized screening. Quality of mammograms has largely increased because of technical control and training of radiologists and radiographers. Digital systems are allowed in the program from January 2008 and it is too early to measure the impact of this new technology. Performance indicators are globally satisfactory, and the number of positive mammograms was 10.1% in 2006. Cancer detection rates increased from 5% per hundred in 2001 to 6.7% per hundred in 2005-2006 and second reading detected 6.4% of all cancers in 2006. Improvements have concerned screening and diagnosis and all age groups. France is the first European country for the annual volume of mammograms in the screening programme.

A pooled analysis of interval cancer rates in six European countries.

The objective of this study was to assess detection rates and interval breast cancer (IC) rates from eight programmes in the European Breast Cancer Screening Network. A common data collection protocol was used to explore differences in IC rates among programmes and discuss their potential determinants. Pooled analysis was used to describe IC rates by age, compliance in screening, recall rate, screening detection (SD) rate and expected breast cancer incidence. Participation in screening averaged 77.9% (range 42.6-88.7%), recall rate 5.4% (range 3.3-17.7%) in the initial and 3.4% (range 1.8-8.9%) in the subsequent screening rounds, and SD rate was 60.4 (range 41.6-91) per 10 000 women in initial and 38.5 (range 31.3-62.6) in subsequent screens. IC rate during first 12 months after screening was 5.9 (range 2.1-7.3) per 10 000 women screened negative and 12.6 (range 6.3-15) in the second year of the interval. IC comprised 28% of the IC and SD cancers. The ratio between IC rate and expected incidence was 0.29 for the first 12 months and 0.63 for the 13-24 months period. Sensitivity was higher for the ages 60-69 years and for initial tests than subsequent tests. There were distinct differences in the IC rates between programmes. The results of this study reveal large variations in screening sensitivity and performance. Pooled evaluation of some process indicators within the European breast cancer screening programmes proved to be feasible and is likely to be useful for the future, particularly if it is performed regularly and extensively.

[Decline in breast cancer incidence in 2005 and 2006 in France: a paradoxical trend]. / Baisse de l'incidence des cancers du sein en 2005 et 2006 en France: un phénomène paradoxal.

The objective of this paper is to measure breast cancer incidence rates between 2000 and 2006, and to analyse during this period the changes in mammographic screening and in the use of hormone-replacement therapy (HRT). Incidence rates were calculated from the new cases of breast cancers among affiliates of the general schema of the national health fund who received first time approval for their long-term disorder. We obtained the trends in HRT use and in mammographic screening from the database of the health fund and from the National Institute for Public Health Surveillance. Between 2000 and 2004, the increase in the annual age adjusted incidence of breast cancer was 2.1 %. Decline in breast cancer incidence was 4.3 % between 2004 and 2005, and 3 % between 2005 and 2006. During this period, the decrease was evident only among women who were 50 years of age or older: the decline was 6 % between 2004 and 2005 and 5.3 % between 2005 and 2006. Between 2000 and 2006, the annual rates of HRT use declined by 62 % and organized screening mammography increased by 335 %. The observation of a decline in breast cancer incidence during the implementation of a screening programme is a paradox. The concomitant and dramatic reduction in the use of HRT is the only major environmental change to explain this trend.

Importance of comparison of current and prior mammograms in breast cancer screening.

PURPOSE: To retrospectively determine the influence of comparing current mammograms with prior mammograms on breast cancer detection in screening and to investigate a protocol in which prior mammograms are viewed only when necessary. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval was not required. Participants gave written informed consent. Twelve experienced screening radiologists read 160 soft-copy screening mammograms twice, once with and once without prior mammograms. Eighty mammograms were obtained in women in whom breast cancer was diagnosed later; the other 80 mammograms had been reported as normal or benign. All cancers were visible in retrospect. Readers located potential abnormalities, estimated likelihood of malignancy for each finding, and indicated whether prior mammograms were considered necessary. The effect of prior mammograms on detection was determined by computing the mean lesion localized fraction in a range of low fractions of nonlesion locations corresponding to operating points in screening. Scores for both reading sessions were combined to assess the effect of making prior mammograms available only when requested. Data were analyzed by comparing the number of localized lesions between the two reading conditions with a paired two-tailed Student t test and applying a linear mixed model to test differences in average mean lesion localized fraction between reading conditions. P values less than .05 indicated statistical significance. RESULTS: Without prior mammograms, significantly more annotations were made. When only positive cases were considered, no difference was observed. Reading performance was significantly better when prior screening mammograms were available. At fixed lesion localized fraction, nonlesion localized fraction was reduced by 44% (P<.001) on average when prior mammograms were read. Performance was also increased for combined reading mode (ie, when prior mammograms were available on request only). However, this increase was smaller than that when prior mammograms were always available. Prior mammograms were requested in 24%-33% of all cases and were requested more often in positive cases. CONCLUSION: Comparison with prior mammograms significantly improves overall performance and can reduce referrals due to nonlesion locations. Limiting the availability of prior mammograms to cases selected by the reader reduces the beneficial effect of prior mammograms.

[Economic evaluation of the new national breast cancer screening programme in France: application to the Bouche-du-Rhone district]. / Evaluation économique du nouveau programme de dépistage du cancer du sein en France: application dans les Bouches-du-Rhône.

The purpose is to measure the costs of the new national breast cancer screening programme in France and to compare these with those of the previous programme in the Bouches-du-Rhône district. Direct screening costs and costs related to diagnosis and assessment were collected. Costs are presented by screening period, by organisms involved in the screening program and by corresponding phase within the screening process. The total cost of the screening program total cost has increased from 5587487 euros to 9345469 euros between the two campaigns. The main reasons are the investment costs in the new screening program, the increase in the target population and the increased fee for programs. This study presents a first estimate of the costs related to the new national breast cancer screening program. Results of this study may help to guide future decisions on the further development of breast cancer screening in France.

[Breast cancer: generalised screening in France from now on]. / Cancer du sein: un dépistage désormais généralisé en France.

With the first randomised screening trials for breast cancer having proved in the 1980s the efficacity of screening, a more ambitious programme has been put in place in France from 1989 to 2001. Based on existing radiological structures, it consists of one image per breast, 2 readings, every 3 years. The management is departmental. It is rapidly completed by quality assurance programmes of the radiology companies. The evaluation of the screening programme has been undertaken by the VS since 1998 and uses the European indicators of efficacity. The results, heterogenous at the beginning, later improved: from 1990 to 1998, the percentage of small size invasive cancers or those equal to 10 mm increased from 30% to 35%, and the second reading has permitted, according to the departments, the detection of 10% to 25% of supplementary cancers. In 1999, the screening was modified: 2 images per breast, 2 readings [corrected] The protocol published in 2001 involves a clinical examination by a radiologist, 2 (or 3) images per breast, 2 readings if the examination is normal [corrected] The second reading is centralised and made by a specialised radiologist [corrected] The place for ultrasound and numerical mammography hasn't yet been defined. Since the beginning of 2004, the generalisation of the screening programme has been effective in France.