-
Cancer Medicine Apr 2024Contrast-enhanced spectral imaging (CEM) is a new mammography technique, but its diagnostic value in dense breasts is still inconclusive. We did a systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Contrast-enhanced spectral imaging (CEM) is a new mammography technique, but its diagnostic value in dense breasts is still inconclusive. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating the diagnostic performance of CEM for suspicious findings in dense breasts.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched systematically until August 6, 2023. Prospective and retrospective studies were included to evaluate the diagnostic performance of CEM for suspicious findings in dense breasts. The QUADAS-2 tool was used to evaluate the quality and risk of bias of the included studies. STATA V.16.0 and Review Manager V.5.3 were used to meta-analyze the included studies.
RESULTS
A total of 10 studies (827 patients, 958 lesions) were included. These 10 studies reported the diagnostic performance of CEM for the workup of suspicious lesions in patients with dense breasts. The summary sensitivity and summary specificity were 0.95 (95% CI, 0.92-0.97) and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.70-0.89), respectively. Enhanced lesions, circumscribed margins, and malignancy were statistically correlated. The relative malignancy OR value of the enhanced lesions was 28.11 (95% CI, 6.84-115.48). The relative malignancy OR value of circumscribed margins was 0.17 (95% CI, 0.07-0.45).
CONCLUSION
CEM has high diagnostic performance in the workup of suspicious findings in dense breasts, and when lesions are enhanced and have irregular margins, they are often malignant.
Topics: Female; Humans; Breast; Breast Density; Breast Neoplasms; Contrast Media; Mammography; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 38659408
DOI: 10.1002/cam4.7128 -
Oncology 2021The aim of this study is to systematically review the literature to summarize the evidence surrounding the clinical utility of artificial intelligence (AI) in the field...
BACKGROUND
The aim of this study is to systematically review the literature to summarize the evidence surrounding the clinical utility of artificial intelligence (AI) in the field of mammography. Databases from PubMed, IEEE Xplore, and Scopus were searched for relevant literature. Studies evaluating AI models in the context of prediction and diagnosis of breast malignancies that also reported conventional performance metrics were deemed suitable for inclusion. From 90 unique citations, 21 studies were considered suitable for our examination. Data was not pooled due to heterogeneity in study evaluation methods.
SUMMARY
Three studies showed the applicability of AI in reducing workload. Six studies demonstrated that AI can aid in diagnosis, with up to 69% reduction in false positives and an increase in sensitivity ranging from 84 to 91%. Five studies show how AI models can independently mark and classify suspicious findings on conventional scans, with abilities comparable with radiologists. Seven studies examined AI predictive potential for breast cancer and risk score calculation. Key Messages: Despite limitations in the current evidence base and technical obstacles, this review suggests AI has marked potential for extensive use in mammography. Additional works, including large-scale prospective studies, are warranted to elucidate the clinical utility of AI.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Machine Learning; Mammography; Reproducibility of Results
PubMed: 34023831
DOI: 10.1159/000515698 -
Korean Journal of Radiology Aug 2021To compare the accuracy for detecting breast cancer in the diagnostic setting between the use of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), defined as DBT alone or combined DBT... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To compare the accuracy for detecting breast cancer in the diagnostic setting between the use of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), defined as DBT alone or combined DBT and digital mammography (DM), and the use of DM alone through a systematic review and meta-analysis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Ovid-MEDLINE, Ovid-Embase, Cochrane Library and five Korean local databases were searched for articles published until March 25, 2020. We selected studies that reported diagnostic accuracy in women who were recalled after screening or symptomatic. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. A bivariate random effects model was used to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity. We compared the diagnostic accuracy between DBT and DM alone using meta-regression and subgroup analyses by modality of intervention, country, existence of calcifications, breast density, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category threshold, study design, protocol for participant sampling, sample size, reason for diagnostic examination, and number of readers who interpreted the studies.
RESULTS
Twenty studies (n = 44513) that compared DBT and DM alone were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86-0.93) and 0.90 (95% CI 0.84-0.94), respectively, for DBT, which were higher than 0.76 (95% CI 0.68-0.83) and 0.83 (95% CI 0.73-0.89), respectively, for DM alone ( < 0.001). The area under the summary receiver operating characteristics curve was 0.95 (95% CI 0.93-0.97) for DBT and 0.86 (95% CI 0.82-0.88) for DM alone. The higher sensitivity and specificity of DBT than DM alone were consistently noted in most subgroup and meta-regression analyses.
CONCLUSION
Use of DBT was more accurate than DM alone for the diagnosis of breast cancer. Women with clinical symptoms or abnormal screening findings could be more effectively evaluated for breast cancer using DBT, which has a superior diagnostic performance compared to DM alone.
Topics: Breast Density; Breast Neoplasms; Early Detection of Cancer; Female; Humans; Mammography; Mass Screening; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 34047504
DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2020.1227 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2021mutation carriers are suggested with regular breast cancer surveillance screening strategies using mammography with supplementary MRI as an adjunct tool in Western...
BACKGROUND
mutation carriers are suggested with regular breast cancer surveillance screening strategies using mammography with supplementary MRI as an adjunct tool in Western countries. From a cost-effectiveness perspective, however, the benefits of screening modalities remain controversial among different mutated genes and screening schedules.
METHODS
We searched the MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to collect and compare the results of different cost-effectiveness analyses. A simulated model was used to predict the impact of screening strategies in the target group on cost, life-year gained, quality-adjusted life years, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).
RESULTS
Nine cost-effectiveness studies were included. Combined mammography and MRI strategy is cost-effective in mutation carriers for the middle-aged group (age 35 to 54). mutation carriers are less likely to benefit from adjunct MRI screening, which implies that mammography alone would be sufficient from a cost-effectiveness perspective, regardless of dense breast cancer.
CONCLUSIONS
Precision screening strategies among mutation carriers should be conducted according to the acceptable ICER, i.e., a combination of mammography and MRI for mutation carriers and mammography alone for mutation carriers.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO, identifier CRD42020205471.
PubMed: 35083138
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.763161 -
Journal of Family Medicine and Primary... Aug 2021Due to the contradictory results of previous research and the lack of a specific study to address the effective nursing interventions in the early diagnosis of cancer,...
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Due to the contradictory results of previous research and the lack of a specific study to address the effective nursing interventions in the early diagnosis of cancer, the purpose of this study was to determine the effect of nursing interventions on early diagnosis of cancer.
METHODS
This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted during the last 5 years from 2015 to September 30, 2020. The articles related to the nursing interventions to early diagnosis of cancer were achieved from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, ISI, Scopus databases, and Google and Google Scholar search engines. Risk-ratio with a 95% confidence interval (CI) between the intervention and control groups was determined using the fixed-effect model, and the Mantel-Haenszel method and I2 showed the heterogeneity of studies. Stata V16 software was used for meta-analysis.
RESULTS
The effect of an intervention on early diagnosis of breast cancer was evaluated using mammography, clinical breast examination, and breast self-exam. A total of 300 individuals participated in the study. RR results in the intervention group showed the effectiveness of nursing interventions on breast cancer detected early in both the mammography and colonoscopy (RR, 1.18 95% CI 0.57, 1.79. =0.00 and RR, 0.58, 95% CI 0.42, 0.75, = 0.00, respectively).
CONCLUSION
A variety of nursing interventions including education, consultation, patient guidance, and reminders can have a positive impact on the early detection of cancers.
PubMed: 34660432
DOI: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_2148_20 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Jun 2024Breast cancer (BC) is one of the leading causes of mortality worldwide. There are observed disparities in patients with disability as compared to those without... (Review)
Review
Breast cancer (BC) is one of the leading causes of mortality worldwide. There are observed disparities in patients with disability as compared to those without disability, which leads to poor BC screening attendance, thereby worsening disease management. Aim: The aim of this systematic review is to investigate if there are disparities in screening rates in women with disability as compared to those without disability, as well as the different factors that pose barriers to patients with disability for enrolment in BC screening programs. : Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we systematically reviewed published articles between 2008 and 2023, which assessed different factors that contributed to poor attendance in BC screening programs held across different countries. Detailed study characteristics were obtained, and methodological quality assessment was performed on the individual studies included in this review. : A total of fifty-three articles were identified as eligible studies based on the pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. These included 7,252,913 patients diagnosed with BC (913,902 patients with disability/6,339,011 patients without disability). The results revealed there are demographic, clinical, financial, and service-related barriers that contributed to lower screening rates in disabled patients as compared to non-disabled. Patient age is the most common factor, with the highest effect observed for 80 years (vs. 30-44 years) [odds ratio (OR) = 13.93 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 8.27-23.47), < 0.0001], followed by race/ethnicity for Hispanic (vs. non-Hispanic white) [OR = 9.5 (95%CI = 1.0-91.9), < 0.05]. Additionally, patients with multiple disabilities had the highest rate of dropouts [OR = 27.4 (95%CI = 21.5-33.3)]. Other factors like education, income, marital status, and insurance coverage were essential barriers in screening programs. This study presents a holistic view of all barriers to poor BC screening attendance in disabled patients, thereby exacerbating health inequalities. A standardized approach to overcome the identified barriers and the need for a tailored guideline, especially for disability groups, is inevitable.
PubMed: 38892994
DOI: 10.3390/jcm13113283 -
Disease Markers 2022This study is aimed at determining the best nonacid nucleic blood tumor marker panels in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in order to detect breast cancer... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
This study is aimed at determining the best nonacid nucleic blood tumor marker panels in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in order to detect breast cancer in early stages (I, II, and III) among eligible women for breast cancer screening. PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane were systematically reviewed to assess nonacid nucleic blood tumor marker panels' diagnostic value in women, both healthy and patient (before any anticancer treatment), for detecting breast cancer. A network meta-analysis was carried out using a Bayesian network meta-analysis to estimate combined odd ratio (OR) and 95% CI credible interval for presenting the results. Rankograms plot was drawn to rank the diagnostic value of different panels. Of the 2358 titles initially identified, 9 studies and 8 panels were included in the network meta-analysis. Panels A (MMP-9/TIMP-1) and K (TF1+TF2+TF3) had the highest sensitivity in early stages, as panel A with OR = 11.61 and 95% CI (1.49-102.5) demonstrated a better function than mammography. Panels H (CA 15.3 + IL-18) and A (MMP-9/TIMP-1) had the highest specificity in early stages, but no significant difference with mammography. Panels A (MMP-9/TIMP-1) and H (CA 15.3 + IL-18) had the highest accuracy in early stages, as they significantly exhibited a higher function than mammography with OR = 6.87 and 95% CI (2.07-31.35) as well as OR = 3.44 and 95% CI (1.15-11.07), respectively. Panel A including MMP-9/TIMP-1 in early stages demonstrated a higher diagnostic value for breast cancer than the rest of the panels.
Topics: Bayes Theorem; Biomarkers, Tumor; Breast Neoplasms; Early Detection of Cancer; Female; Humans; Mammography; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 35222743
DOI: 10.1155/2022/4119345 -
PloS One 2020Unsatisfactory participation rate at population based organised breast cancer screening is a long standing problem. Social media, with 3.2 billion users in 2019, is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Unsatisfactory participation rate at population based organised breast cancer screening is a long standing problem. Social media, with 3.2 billion users in 2019, is potentially an important site of breast cancer related discourse. Determining whether these platforms might be used as channels by screening providers to reach under-screened women may have considerable public health significance.
OBJECTIVES
By systematically reviewing original research studies on breast cancer related social media discourse, we had two aims: first, to assess the volume, participants and content of breast screening social media communication and second, to find out whether social media can be used by screening organisers as a channel of patient education.
METHODS
We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). After searching PubMed, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Springer and Ebsco, 17 studies were found that met our criteria. A systematic narrative framework was used for data synthesis. Owing to the high degree of heterogeneity in social media channels, outcomes and measurement included in this study, a meta-analytic approach was not appropriate.
RESULTS
The volume of breast cancer related social media discourse is considerable. The majority of participants are lay individuals as opposed to healthcare professionals or advocacy groups. The lay misunderstandings surrounding the harms and benefits of mammography is well mirrored in the content of social media discourse. Although there is criticism, breast cancer screening sentiment on the social media ranges from the neutral to the positive. Social media is suitable for offering peer emotional support for potential participants.
CONCLUSION
Dedicated breast screening websites operated by screening organisers would ensure much needed quality controlled information and also provide space for reliable question and answer forums, the sharing of personal experience and the provision of peer and professional support.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Databases, Factual; Early Detection of Cancer; Female; Health Promotion; Humans; Mammography; Social Media
PubMed: 32294139
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231422 -
The British Journal of Radiology Aug 2020Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is an important method for breast cancer treatment. By monitoring its pathological response, the selection of clinical treatment... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is an important method for breast cancer treatment. By monitoring its pathological response, the selection of clinical treatment strategies can be guided. In this study, the meta-analysis was used to compare the accuracy of contrast-enhanced MRI (CE-MRI) and contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) in detecting the pathological response of NAC.
METHODS
Literatures associated to CE-MRI and CESM in the evaluation of pathological response of NAC were searched from PubMed, Cochrane Library, web of science, and EMBASE databases. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool was used to assess the quality of studies. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the SROC curve were calculated to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of CE-MRI and CESM in monitoring the pathological response of NAC.
RESULTS
There were 24 studies involved, 18 of which only underwent CE-MRI examination, three of which only underwent CESM examination, and three of which underwent both CE-MRI and CESM examination. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of CE-MRI were 0.77 (95%CI, 0.67-0.84) and 0.82 (95%CI, 0.73-0.89), respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of CESM were 0.83 (95%CI, 0.66-0.93) and 0.82 (95%CI, 0.68-0.91), respectively. The AUCs of SROC curve for CE-MRI and CESM were 0.86 and 0.89, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Compared to CE-MRI, CESM has equal specificity, greater sensitivity and excellent performance, which may have a brighter prospect in evaluating the pathological response of breast cancer to NAC.
ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE
CESM showed equal specificity, greater sensitivity, and excellent performance than CE-MRI.
Topics: Breast; Breast Neoplasms; Contrast Media; Female; Humans; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Mammography; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32574075
DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20200301 -
Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) Apr 2024High breast density is an independent risk factor for breast cancer and decreases the sensitivity of mammography. This systematic review synthesizes the evidence on the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
High breast density is an independent risk factor for breast cancer and decreases the sensitivity of mammography. This systematic review synthesizes the evidence on the impact of breast density (BD) information and/or notification on women's psychosocial outcomes among women from racial and ethnic minority groups.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed in March 2023, and the articles were identified using CINHAL, Embase, Medline, and PsychInfo databases. The search strategy combined the terms "breast", "density", "notification" and synonyms. The authors specifically kept the search terms broad and did not include terms related to race and ethnicity. Full-text articles were reviewed for analysis by race, ethnicity and primary language of participants. Two authors evaluated the eligibility of studies with verification from the study team, extracted and crosschecked data, and assessed the risk of bias.
RESULTS
Of 1784 articles, 32 articles published from 2003 to 2023 were included. Thirty-one studies were conducted in the United States and one in Australia, with 28 quantitative and four qualitative methodologies. The overall results in terms of breast density awareness, knowledge, communication with healthcare professionals, screening intentions and supplemental screening practice were heterogenous across studies. Barriers to understanding BD notifications and intentions/access to supplemental screening among racial and ethnic minorities included socioeconomic factors, language, health literacy and medical mistrust.
CONCLUSIONS
A one-size approach to inform women about their BD may further disadvantage racial and ethnic minority women. BD notification and accompanying information should be tailored and translated to ensure readability and understandability by all women.
Topics: Female; Humans; United States; Breast Density; Breast Neoplasms; Ethnicity; Ethnic and Racial Minorities; Trust; Minority Groups
PubMed: 38430905
DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2024.103693