Search

The article presents a study to assess the exposure-response correlation of lung cancer and crocidolite of Wittenoon crocidolite employees in Australia. It features results of the cohort research on the lung cancer cases of the 6910 crocidolite employees in the country until December 1994. Moreover, it features the predictors of lung cancer among patients.

Introduction: Artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms for interpreting mammograms have the potential to improve the effectiveness of population breast cancer screening programmes if they can detect cancers, including interval cancers, without contributing substantially to overdiagnosis. Studies suggesting that AI has comparable or greater accuracy than radiologists commonly employ 'enriched' datasets in which cancer prevalence is higher than in population screening. Routine screening outcome metrics (cancer detection and recall rates) cannot be estimated from these datasets, and accuracy estimates may be subject to spectrum bias which limits generalisabilty to real-world screening. We aim to address these limitations by comparing the accuracy of AI and radiologists in a cohort of consecutive of women attending a real-world population breast cancer screening programme., Methods and Analysis: A retrospective, consecutive cohort of digital mammography screens from 109 000 distinct women was assembled from BreastScreen WA (BSWA), Western Australia's biennial population screening programme, from November 2016 to December 2017. The cohort includes 761 screen-detected and 235 interval cancers. Descriptive characteristics and results of radiologist double-reading will be extracted from BSWA outcomes data collection. Mammograms will be reinterpreted by a commercial AI algorithm (DeepHealth). AI accuracy will be compared with that of radiologist single-reading based on the difference in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Cancer detection and recall rates for combined AI-radiologist reading will be estimated by pairing the first radiologist read per screen with the AI algorithm, and compared with estimates for radiologist double-reading., Ethics and Dissemination: This study has ethical approval from the Women and Newborn Health Service Ethics Committee (EC00350) and the Curtin University Human Research Ethics Committee (HRE2020-0316). Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conferences. Results will also be disseminated to stakeholders in Australian breast cancer screening programmes and policy makers in population screening., Competing Interests: Competing interests: WL and JGK are employees of RadNet, the parent company of DeepHealth. CL reports textbook royalties from McGraw Hill, Wolters Kluwer, and Oxford University Press; and research consulting fees from GRAIL, all outside the submitted work. SZ reports speaker fees from Siemens Healthcare AG. Other authors have no competing interest to declare., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To assess the impact of age expansion of screening (EOS) of the target age group from 50 to 69 to 50-74 in Australia, which began mid-2013, by examining screening uptake and outcomes of older women, and by identifying factors associated with continuing screening after reaching the age of 75 years., Methods: Retrospective study using data from women aged 65+ who attended BreastScreen Western Australia between 2010 and 2017 for free mammograms. Screening uptake and screening outcomes were calculated for the periods before (2010-2012) and after (2015-2017) the age EOS to women aged 70-74. Logistic regression was used to identify variables associated with continuing screening after reaching age 75 years, while controlling for possible confounding variables., Results: Age EOS increased screening uptake amongst women aged 70-74 b y 36% and amongst women ≥75 years by 3% while screening uptake in women aged 65-69 decreased by 3%. Rate of invasive screened-detected cancers significantly decreased among women aged 70-74 from 11.4/1000 screens before to 8.1/1000 screens after age EOS. Likelihood of continuing screening into age ≥75 years was higher in women who had a personal history or a family history of breast cancer, or used hormone replacement therapy within six months of screening. Women who were born outside Australia were less likely to continue screening after reaching age 75 years., Conclusions: Our study found that age EOS to women aged 70-74 was effective in increasing screening uptake in this age-group but was accompanied by a moderate increase in screening uptake amongst women ≥75 years via self-referral for whom potential benefit of screening may be limited., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)