Search

Introduction: The evolving role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in medicine, particularly in radiology and population-based breast cancer screening programs, offers potential accuracy gains and efficiency improvements. However, successful implementation requires understanding of healthcare workers’ views on AI, which this study aims to explore within the Australian BreastScreen program. Methods: An online survey was distributed to clinical staff involved in breast imaging, collecting responses from November 2022 to April 2023. The survey encompassed demographic information, opinions, and experiences with AI in medical imaging, with questions covering various scenarios of AI integration in BreastScreen. Results: Out of an estimated 350 professionals contacted, 95 responded, with 84.2 % (80/95) being radiologists. Less than half of respondents (44.9 %, 40/89) had worked with artificial intelligence for image classification previously. The majority of radiologists 74.2 % (46/62) thought that the use of AI in reading mammograms for BreastScreen would improve workflow. However, radiologists thought they would behave with increasing caution with scenarios where AI was more autonomous, with the majority of radiologists (63.3 %, 38/60) uncomfortable with holding accountability when the AI was used to triage and remove cases from the workflow. Notably, 60 % of radiologists (36/60) expressed concerns about accountability. Discussion: The findings suggest an optimistic attitude towards AI among Australian healthcare workers, although when given hypothetical scenarios for the way AI could be integrated into BreastScreen, there was increasing caution with scenarios where AI was more autonomous. This study highlights understanding and concerns of healthcare professionals working in population screening which are important to address when implementing AI into the healthcare system.

Introduction: In Nepal, breast cancer is the second most common cancer accounting for a large number of deaths.The subtype Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is linked to poor prognosis and is characterized by the absence of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2). This study describes the outcome of women with TNBC as compared to other breast cancers in Bir Hospital in Nepal. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study conducted in Bir Hospital, National Academy of Medical Sciences. The breast cancer data in Department of Surgery and Department of Oncology were collected from July 2021 to June 2024. The study data on demographic details, clinical findings, radiological and pathological investigations, operative procedures, neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapy, surgical and oncological outcomeswere collected. The study approval was taken from Institutional Review Board of National Academy of Medical Sciences. Results: There were 72 breast cancer patientsout of which 10 (13.8 %) were TNBC. Majority of the cases (70%) underwent modified radical mastectomy and 60% of them had received neoadjuvant therapy in TNBC cases. One out of 10 had positive margin post mastectomy. The proportion of TNBC patients with postoperative wound infection, seroma and flap necrosis were 10% each. The mean lymph node positivity was less in TNBC group as compared to other breast cancers.There was one recurrence, one metastasis and no mortality till one year follow up. Conclusion: The surgical outcome was satisfactory and with neo-adjuvant, surgery and adjuvant therapy, there is less tumor recurrence and satisfactory disease free survival and overall survival.

Abstract Internationally, population breast cancer screening is moving towards a risk-stratified approach and requires engagement and acceptance from current and future screening clients. A decision aid ( www.defineau.org ) was developed based on women’s views, values, and knowledge regarding risk-stratified breast cancer screening. This study aims to evaluate the impact of the decision aid on women’s knowledge, risk perception, acceptance of risk assessment and change of screening frequency, and decision-making. Here we report the results of a pre and post-survey in which women who are clients of BreastScreen Victoria were invited to complete an online questionnaire before and after viewing the decision aid. 3200 potential participants were invited, 242 responded with 127 participants completing both surveys. After reviewing the decision aid there was a significant change in knowledge, acceptance of risk-stratified breast cancer screening and of decreased frequency screening for lower risk. High levels of acceptance of risk stratification, genetic testing and broad support for tailored screening persisted pre and post review. The DEFINE decision aid has a positive impact on acceptance of lower frequency screening, a major barrier to the success of a risk-stratified program and may contribute to facilitating change to the population breast screening program in Australia.

Objective: To examine the experiences, needs, and perceptions of health professionals(HPs) treating women diagnosed with cancer during pregnancy(gestational cancer, GC). Methods: Interviews were undertaken with Australian HPs who had treated women diagnosed with GC over the previous five years. HPs were recruited via social media, and professional and community networks. Questions focussed upon HPs’ confidence caring for these women, whether current guidelines/training met their needs, psychological impacts of care provision, and service gaps. Interview data were analysed thematically. Results: Twenty-seven HPs were interviewed; most were oncology HPs(22/27) with experience caring for women with gestational breast cancer and 13 had a breast-specific clinical focus (e.g. breast surgeon). Many were currently treating women with GC(48%) or had in the last 6–12 months(29.6%). Four themes were identified: A clinically complex case, Managing multi-disciplinary care, Centralised resources for health professionals, and Liaison, information and shared experiences for women. HPs found this population personally challenging to treat. They reported initial uncertainty regarding treatment due to infrequent exposure to GC, limited resources/information, and the need to collaborate with services with which they did not usually engage. Solutions offered include centralised resources, clinical liaison/care coordinators, and connecting women with GC with peer support. Conclusions: HPs perceived women with GC as a vulnerable, complex population and experienced challenges providing comprehensive care; particularly when treatment was delivered at geographically separated hospitals. Systemic changes are needed to optimise comprehensive care for these women. Their insights can guide the development of more integrated cancer and obstetric care, and better HP support.

Whilst some of the diversity in management of women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) may be explained by tumour characteristics, the role of patient preference and the factors underlying those preferences have been less frequently examined. We have used a descriptive qualitative study to explore treatment decisions for a group of Australian women diagnosed with DCIS through mammographic screening. Semi-structured telephone interviews were performed with 16 women diagnosed with DCIS between January 2012 and December 2018, recruited through the LifePool dataset (a subset of BreastScreen participants who have agreed to participate in research). Content analysis using deductive coding identified three themes: participants did not have a clear understanding of their diagnosis or prognosis; reported involvement in decision making about management varied; specific factors including the psychosexual impact of mastectomy and perceptions of radiotherapy, could act as barriers or facilitators to specific decisions about treatment.The treatment the women received was not simply determined by the characteristics of their disease. Interaction with the managing clinician was pivotal, however many other factors played a part in individual decisions. Recognising that decisions are not purely a function of disease characteristics is important for both women with DCIS and the clinicians who care for them.