Search

BACKGROUND: Psychosocial impacts of lung cancer screening (LCS) can cause both harm to individuals and serve as barriers to screening participation and adherence. Early data suggest that the psychosocial impacts of LCS are moderated by certain factors (e.g. sociodemographic characteristics and beliefs), but evidence synthesis is lacking. This systematic review aimed to understand individual-level risk factors for psychosocial burden during LCS as a precursor to developing strategies to identify and support participants, and improve LCS engagement. METHODS: Four databases were searched for full-text articles published in English reporting any association between participant factors and psychosocial outcomes experienced during LCS. Study quality was assessed by two independent investigators; findings were synthesised narratively. The review was pre-registered with PROSPERO and adhered to PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: Thirty-five articles were included; most (33/35) studies were assessed at high or moderate risk of bias. Study designs were pre-post (n = 13), cross-sectional (n = 13), qualitative (n = 8) and mixed-methods (n = 1) and conducted primarily in the United States (n = 17). Psychological burden in LCS varied, and was often associated with younger age, female gender, current smoking status or increased smoking history, lower education, lower socio-economic group, not being married or co-habiting and experience with cancer. However, results were mixed, and non-significant associations were also reported across all factors. Beliefs (e.g. fatalism, stigma and expectation of LDCT results) and comorbid psychological burden were also linked to psychosocial outcomes, but evidence was sparse. Associations between risk perception, other participant factors and other psychosocial outcomes was inconclusive, likely reflecting individual biases in risk conceptualisation. CONCLUSION(S): Several participant factors are consistently reported to be associated with psychosocial im more...

01 september 2023, Contains fulltext : 296074.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), OBJECTIVES: To report mastectomy and reoperation rates in women who had breast MRI for screening (S-MRI subgroup) or diagnostic (D-MRI subgroup) purposes, using multivariable analysis for investigating the role of MRI referral/nonreferral and other covariates in driving surgical outcomes. METHODS: The MIPA observational study enrolled women aged 18-80 years with newly diagnosed breast cancer destined to have surgery as the primary treatment, in 27 centres worldwide. Mastectomy and reoperation rates were compared using non-parametric tests and multivariable analysis. RESULTS: A total of 5828 patients entered analysis, 2763 (47.4%) did not undergo MRI (noMRI subgroup) and 3065 underwent MRI (52.6%); of the latter, 2441/3065 (79.7%) underwent MRI with preoperative intent (P-MRI subgroup), 510/3065 (16.6%) D-MRI, and 114/3065 S-MRI (3.7%). The reoperation rate was 10.5% for S-MRI, 8.2% for D-MRI, and 8.5% for P-MRI, while it was 11.7% for noMRI (p ≤ 0.023 for comparisons with D-MRI and P-MRI). The overall mastectomy rate (first-line mastectomy plus conversions from conserving surgery to mastectomy) was 39.5% for S-MRI, 36.2% for P-MRI, 24.1% for D-MRI, and 18.0% for noMRI. At multivariable analysis, using noMRI as reference, the odds ratios for overall mastectomy were 2.4 (p < 0.001) for S-MRI, 1.0 (p = 0.957) for D-MRI, and 1.9 (p < 0.001) for P-MRI. CONCLUSIONS: Patients from the D-MRI subgroup had the lowest overall mastectomy rate (24.1%) among MRI subgroups and the lowest reoperation rate (8.2%) together with P-MRI (8.5%). This analysis offers an insight into how the initial indication for MRI affects the subsequent surgical treatment of breast cancer. KEY POINTS: • Of 3065 breast MRI examinations, 79.7% were performed with preoperative intent (P-MRI), 16.6% were diagnostic (D-MRI), and 3.7% were screening (S-MRI) examinations. • The D-MRI subgroup had the lowest mastectomy rate (24.1%) among MRI subgroups and the lowest reoperation rate (8.2%) together with P-MRI more...

Item does not contain fulltext, OBJECTIVES: Preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can inform surgical planning but might cause overtreatment by increasing the mastectomy rate. The Multicenter International Prospective Analysis (MIPA) study investigated this controversial issue. METHODS: This observational study enrolled women aged 18-80 years with biopsy-proven breast cancer, who underwent MRI in addition to conventional imaging (mammography and/or breast ultrasonography) or conventional imaging alone before surgery as routine practice at 27 centers. Exclusion criteria included planned neoadjuvant therapy, pregnancy, personal history of any cancer, and distant metastases. RESULTS: Of 5896 analyzed patients, 2763 (46.9%) had conventional imaging only (noMRI group), and 3133 (53.1%) underwent MRI that was performed for diagnosis, screening, or unknown purposes in 692/3133 women (22.1%), with preoperative intent in 2441/3133 women (77.9%, MRI group). Patients in the MRI group were younger, had denser breasts, more cancers >/= 20 mm, and a higher rate of invasive lobular histology than patients who underwent conventional imaging alone (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Mastectomy was planned based on conventional imaging in 22.4% (MRI group) versus 14.4% (noMRI group) (p < 0.001). The additional planned mastectomy rate in the MRI group was 11.3%. The overall performed first- plus second-line mastectomy rate was 36.3% (MRI group) versus 18.0% (noMRI group) (p < 0.001). In women receiving conserving surgery, MRI group had a significantly lower reoperation rate (8.5% versus 11.7%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians requested breast MRI for women with a higher a priori probability of receiving mastectomy. MRI was associated with 11.3% more mastectomies, and with 3.2% fewer reoperations in the breast conservation subgroup. KEY POINTS: * In 19% of patients of the MIPA study, breast MRI was performed for screening or diagnostic purposes. * The current patient selection to preoperative breast MR more...

Introduction Artifi cial 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 di €erence 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 pub more...

Purpose: We aim to describe the treatment patterns and overall survival (OS) outcomes in patients receiving trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (HER2+MBC) in routine clinical care. Methods: Retrospective, whole-of-population cohort study of people initiating T-DM1 for HER2+MBC between October 2015 and May 2019 in Australia. We used dispensing claims to estimate time-to-T-DM1 initiation, duration of treatment, and treatments administered prior to and following T-DM1 therapy. We estimated OS from T-DM1 initiation and stratified results based on whether patients received first- or second-line T-DM1 treatment. We benchmarked outcomes to those reported in the pivotal, EMILIA trial. Results: 345 patients initiated T-DM1: 309 as second-line therapy for HER2+MBC and 36 as first-line therapy. 51% of patients had received endocrine therapy and 98% of second-line patients received pertuzumab prior to starting T-DM1. The median age was 57 years (53 in EMILIA); median time-to-T-DM1 initiation from start of HER2-targeted therapy for HER2+MBC was 11.6 months (IQR: 7.9–16.6); median duration of T-DM1 treatment was 6.5 months (3.1–13.5; 7.6 months in EMILIA), and median OS was 19.3 months (7.9–29.5; 29.9 months in EMILIA). Conclusions: Our findings highlight differences in patient characteristics (older, more previous pertuzumab therapy) and outcomes (shorter OS) from the T-DM1 pivotal trial and provide real-world estimates that can inform patient, clinician and policy, decisions around the use of HER2-targeted therapies in routine clinical care. more...

Purpose: To investigate clinical, radiologic and pathologic features of B3 lesions diagnosed on VABB targeting microcalcifications, for identifying predictors of malignancy. Method: This retrospective multi-centre study included consecutive VABBs performed over a 10-year period on suspicious microcalcifications not associated with other radiological signs diagnosed as B3 on histology from VABB, with outcomes ascertained by surgical excision. Clinical, demographic, radiological and histological (B3 subcategory) data were collected. For statistical analysis (univariate and binary logistic regression), the primary outcome variable was the upgrade rate to malignancy after surgery. Predictors of upgrade to malignancy were identified from clinical, demographic, radiological and pathological variables (including B3 subcategory). Results: Amongst 447 VABBs, there were 57(12.7 %) upgrades to malignancy at surgical histology (36 DCIS and 21 invasive cancer). At univariate analysis, variables significantly associated with increased risk of upgrade to malignancy were age>55 years (p = 0.01), lesion size>10 mm (p < 0.0001), BI-RADS 4b-c and 5 (p = 0.0001), and fine pleomorphic morphology (p = 0.002) of microcalcifications. Binary logistic regression confirmed as significant independent risk factors age, lesion size and BI-RADS category (p = 0.02, 0.02 and 0.0006 respectively). Amongst subcategories of B3 lesions, lobular neoplasia was significantly(p = 0.04) associated with upgrade, confirmed as an independent risk factor [p = 0.03, OR = 2.3(1.1−4.7)]. Flat epithelial atypia was significantly(p = 0.004) associated with reduced odds of upgrade, but binary logistic regression showed only borderline association [p = 0.052, OR = 0.4(0.2–1.01)]. Conclusions: Across B3 lesions diagnosed on histology from VABB of suspicious microcalcifications, older age, size>10 mm, BI-RADS category≥ 4b on imaging, and lobular neoplasia were risk factors for upgrade to malignancy. This inf more...

Contains fulltext : 225795.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access), Despite its high diagnostic performance, the use of breast MRI in the preoperative setting is controversial. It has the potential for personalized surgical management in breast cancer patients, but two of three randomized controlled trials did not show results in favor of its introduction for assessing the disease extent before surgery. Meta-analyses showed a higher mastectomy rate in women undergoing preoperative MRI compared to those who do not. Nevertheless, preoperative breast MRI is increasingly used and a survey from the American Society of Breast Surgeons showed that 41% of respondents ask for it in daily practice. In this context, a large-scale observational multicenter international prospective analysis (MIPA study) was proposed under the guidance of the European Network for the Assessment of Imaging in Medicine (EuroAIM). The aims were (1) to prospectively and systematically collect data on consecutive women with a newly diagnosed breast cancer, not candidates for neoadjuvant therapy, who are offered or not offered breast MRI before surgery according to local practice; (2) to compare these two groups in terms of surgical and clinical endpoints, adjusting for covariates. The underlying hypotheses are that MRI does not cause additional mastectomies compared to conventional imaging, while reducing the reoperation rate in all or in subgroups of patients. Ninety-six centers applied to a web-based call; 36 were initially selected based on volume and quality standards; 27 were active for enrollment. On November 2018, the target of 7000 enrolled patients was reached. The MIPA study is presently at the analytic phase. Key Points • Breast MRI has a high diagnostic performance but its utility in the preoperative setting is controversial. • A large-scale observational multicenter prospective study was launched to compare women receiving with those not receiving preoperative MRI. • Twenty-seven centers enrolled more than 7000 patients. The study is presently at the ana more...

Breast cancer care is a leading area for development of artificial intelligence (AI), with applications including screening and diagnosis, risk calculation, prognostication and clinical decision-support, management planning, and precision medicine. We review the ethical, legal and social implications of these developments. We consider the values encoded in algorithms, the need to evaluate outcomes, and issues of bias and transferability, data ownership, confidentiality and consent, and legal, moral and professional responsibility. We consider potential effects for patients, including on trust in healthcare, and provide some social science explanations for the apparent rush to implement AI solutions. We conclude by anticipating future directions for AI in breast cancer care. Stakeholders in healthcare AI should acknowledge that their enterprise is an ethical, legal and social challenge, not just a technical challenge. Taking these challenges seriously will require broad engagement, imposition of conditions on implementation, and pre-emptive systems of oversight to ensure that development does not run ahead of evaluation and deliberation. Once artificial intelligence becomes institutionalised, it may be difficult to reverse: a proactive role for government, regulators and professional groups will help ensure introduction in robust research contexts, and the development of a sound evidence base regarding real-world effectiveness. Detailed public discussion is required to consider what kind of AI is acceptable rather than simply accepting what is offered, thus optimising outcomes for health systems, professionals, society and those receiving care. more...

BACKGROUND: Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is an in-situ (pre-cancerous) breast malignancy whereby malignant cells are contained within the basement membrane of the breast ducts. Increasing awareness that some low-risk forms of DCIS might remain indolent for many years has led to concern about overtreatment, with at least 3 clinical trials underway internationally assessing the safety of active monitoring for low-risk DCIS. This study aimed to understand healthcare professionals' (HCPs) views on the management options for patients with DCIS. METHODS: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with HCPs involved in the diagnosis and management of DCIS in Australia and New Zealand. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically using Framework Analysis method. RESULTS: Twenty-six HCPs including 10 breast surgeons, 3 breast physicians, 6 radiation oncologists, and 7 breast care nurses participated. There was a strong overall consensus that DCIS requires active treatment. HCPs generally felt uncomfortable recommending active monitoring as a management option for low-risk DCIS as they viewed this as outside current standard care. Overall, HCPs felt that active monitoring was an unproven strategy in need of an evidence base; however, many acknowledged that active monitoring for low-risk DCIS could be appropriate for patients with significant co-morbidities or limited life expectancy. They believed that most patients would opt for surgery wherever possible. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the important need for robust randomised controlled trial data about active monitoring for women with low-risk DCIS, to provide HCPs with confidence in their management recommendations and decision-making. more...