Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK ‘Alert Level 4’ phase of the B-MaP-C study

Abstract: Background: The B-MaP-C study aimed to determine alterations to breast cancer (BC) management during the peak transmission period of the UK COVID-19 pandemic and the potential impact of these treatment decisions. Methods: This was a national cohort study of patients with early BC undergoing multidisciplinary team (MDT)-guided treatment recommendations during the pandemic, designated ‘standard’ or ‘COVID-altered’, in the preoperative, operative and post-operative setting. Findings: Of 3776 patients (from 64 UK units) in the study, 2246 (59%) had ‘COVID-altered’ management. ‘Bridging’ endocrine therapy was used (n = 951) where theatre capacity was reduced. There was increasing access to COVID-19 low-risk theatres during the study period (59%). In line with national guidance, immediate breast reconstruction was avoided (n = 299). Where adjuvant chemotherapy was omitted (n = 81), the median benefit was only 3% (IQR 2–9%) using ‘NHS Predict’. There was the rapid adoption of new evidence-based hypofractionated radiotherapy (n = 781, from 46 units). Only 14 patients (1%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during their treatment journey. Conclusions: The majority of ‘COVID-altered’ management decisions were largely in line with pre-COVID evidence-based guidelines, implying that breast cancer survival outcomes are unlikely to be negatively impacted by the pandemic. However, in this study, the potential impact of delays to BC presentation or diagnosis remains unknown

Assessment of the Accuracy of AortaScan for Detection of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (AAA)

AbstractBackgroundAortaScan AMI 9700 is a portable 3D ultrasound device that automatically measures the maximum diameter of the abdominal aorta without the need for a trained sonographer. It is designed to rapidly diagnose or exclude an AAA and may have particular use in screening programs. Our objective was to determine its accuracy to detect AAA.MethodsSubjects from our AAA screening and surveillance programs were examined. The aorta was scanned using the AortaScan and computed tomography (CT).ResultsNinety-one subjects underwent imaging (44 AAA on conventional ultrasound surveillance and 47 controls). The largest measurement obtained by AortaScan was compared against the CT-aortic measurement. The mean aortic diameter was 2.8 cm. The CT scan confirmed the diagnosis of AAA in 43 subjects. There was one false positive measurement on conventional ultrasound. AortaScan missed the diagnosis of AAA in eight subjects. There were thirteen false positive measurements. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were 81%, 72%, 72% and 81% respectively.ConclusionA device to detect AAA without the need for a trained operator would have potential in a community-based screening programme. The AortaScan, however, lacks adequate sensitivity and significant technical improvement is necessary before it could be considered a replacement for trained screening personnel