Borderline breast core needle histology: predictive values for malignancy in lesions of uncertain malignant potential (B3)

Breast core needle biopsy (CNB) is an accurate test but may result in borderline histology (lesions of uncertain malignant potential or B3). This is an evaluation of the largest series (to date) of B3 histology, which focusses on estimating positive predictive values (PPV) for malignancy. We identified all B3 CNBs over a 10-year period in a single institution (N=372) from a series of 4035 consecutive needle biopsies. We describe the imaging findings, and report excision histology outcomes (N=279) and category-specific PPV for B3 lesions using two approaches including estimates based on subjects who had either excision or follow-up (N=328). B3 represented 9.2% of all CNB results. Excision histology was benign in 181 (64.9%) and malignant in 98 (35.1%) subjects (61 ductal carcinoma in situ, 37 invasive carcinoma). Positive predictive value for malignancy (based on excision histology) was 35.1% (95% CI: 29.5–40.7) and PPV (based on excision or review) was 29.9% (95% CI: 24.9–34.8). Lesion-specific PPV (estimates in parentheses for excision or follow-up) was atypical ductal hyperplasia 44.7% (40.6%); lobular intraepithelial neoplasia 60.9% (58.3%); papillary lesion 22.7% (15.9%); radial scar 16.7% (12.3%); phyllodes tumour 12.5% (12.5%); and B3 not specified 20.0%. Approximately one-third of CNB results classified as B3 are malignant on excision, and the likelihood of malignancy varies substantially between specific lesion groups. Whereas cases may be selectively managed without surgery, the majority warrant excision biopsy based on our estimates. Research is needed to improve differentiation between malignant and benign diseases in B3 lesions using diagnostic or predictive methods

Tumor-associated lymphocytes and macrophages are related to stromal elastosis and vascular invasion in breast cancer

The tumor microenvironment plays a critical role in breast cancer progression. Here, we investigated tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and associations with macrophage numbers, tumor stromal elastosis, vascular invasion, and tumor detection mode. We performed a population-based retrospective study using data from The Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program in Vestfold County (2004-2009), including 200 screen-detected and 82 interval cancers. The number of TILs (CD45+, CD3+, CD4+, CD8+, and FOXP3+) and tumor-associated macrophages (CD163+) was counted using immunohistochemistry on tissue microarray slides. Lymphatic and blood vessel invasion (LVI and BVI) were recorded using D2-40 and CD31 staining, and the amount of elastosis (high/low) was determined on regular HE-stained slides. High numbers of all TIL subsets were associated with LVI (p ≤ 0.04 for all), and high counts of several TIL subgroups (CD8+, CD45+, and FOXP3+) were associated with BVI (p ≤ 0.04 for all). Increased levels of all TIL subsets, except CD4+, were associated with estrogen receptor-negative tumors (p < 0.001) and high tumor cell proliferation by Ki67 (p < 0.001). Furthermore, high levels of all TIL subsets were associated with high macrophage counts (p < 0.001) and low-grade stromal elastosis (p ≤ 0.02). High counts of CD3+, CD8+, and FOXP3+ TILs were associated with interval detected tumors (p ≤ 0.04 for all). Finally, in the luminal A subgroup, high levels of CD3+ and FOXP3+ TILs were associated with shorter recurrence-free survival, and high counts of FOXP3+ were linked to reduced breast cancer-specific survival. In conclusion, higher levels of different TIL subsets were associated with stromal features such as high macrophage counts (CD163+), presence of vascular invasion, absence of stromal elastosis, as well as increased tumor cell proliferation and interval detection mode. Our findings support a link between immune cells and vascular invasion in more aggressive breast cancer. Notably, presence of TIL subsets showed prognostic value within the luminal A category.publishedVersio

Lung cancer screening program factors that influence psychosocial outcomes: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Lung cancer screening (LCS) programs are being designed and implemented globally. Early data suggests that the psychosocial impacts of LCS are influenced by program factors, but evidence synthesis is needed. This systematic review aimed to elucidate the impact of service-level factors on psychosocial outcomes to inform optimal LCS program design and future implementation. METHODS: Four databases were searched from inception to July 2023. Inclusion criteria were full-text articles published in English that reported an association between any program factors and psychosocial outcomes experienced during LCS. Study quality was appraised, and findings were synthesised narratively. RESULTS: Thirty-two articles were included; 29 studies were assessed at high or moderate risk of bias. Study designs were RCT (n = 3), pre-post (n = 6), cross-sectional (n = 12), mixed-methods (n = 1), and qualitative (n = 10) studies, and conducted primarily in the USA (n = 25). Findings suggested that targeted interventions can improve smoking-related or decisional psychosocial outcomes (e.g., smoking cessation interventions increase readiness/motivation to quit) but impacts of interventions on other psychological outcomes were varied. There was limited evidence reporting association between service delivery components and psychological outcomes, and results suggested moderation by individual aspects (e.g., expectation of results, baseline anxiety). Opportunities for discussion were key in reducing psychological harm. CONCLUSIONS: Certain program factors are reportedly associated with psychosocial impacts of LCS, but study heterogeneity and quality necessitate more real-world studies. Future work should examine (a) implementation of targeted interventions and high-value discussion during LCS, and (b) optimal methods and timing of risk and result communication, to improve psychosocial outcomes while reducing time burden for clinicians

Early prediction of pathologic response to neoadjuvant therapy in breast cancer: Systematic review of the accuracy of MRI

Abstract Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been proposed to have a role in predicting final pathologic response when undertaken early during neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in breast cancer. This paper examines the evidence for MRI's accuracy in early response prediction. A systematic literature search (to February 2011) was performed to identify studies reporting the accuracy of MRI during NAC in predicting pathologic response, including searches of MEDLINE, PREMEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. 13 studies were eligible (total 605 subjects, range 16–188). Dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI was typically performed after 1–2 cycles of anthracycline-based or anthracycline/taxane-based NAC, and compared to a pre-NAC baseline scan. MRI parameters measured included changes in uni- or bidimensional tumour size, three-dimensional volume, quantitative dynamic contrast measurements (volume transfer constant [Ktrans], exchange rate constant [ k ep ], early contrast uptake [ECU]), and descriptive patterns of tumour reduction. Thresholds for identifying response varied across studies. Definitions of response included pathologic complete response (pCR), near-pCR, and residual tumour with evidence of NAC effect (range of response 0–58%). Heterogeneity across MRI parameters and the outcome definition precluded statistical meta-analysis. Based on descriptive presentation of the data, sensitivity/specificity pairs for prediction of pathologic response were highest in studies measuring reductions in Ktrans (near-pCR), ECU (pCR, but not near-pCR) and tumour volume (pCR or near-pCR), at high thresholds (typically >50%); lower sensitivity/specificity pairs were evident in studies measuring reductions in uni- or bidimensional tumour size. However, limitations in study methodology and data reporting preclude definitive conclusions. Methods proposed to address these limitations include: statistical comparison between MRI parameters, and MRI vs other tests (particularly ultrasound and clinical examination); standardising MRI thresholds and pCR definitions; and reporting changes in NAC based on test results. Further studies adopting these methods are warranted

CAD in mammography: lesion-level versus case-level analysis of the effects of prompts on human decisions

Object: To understand decision processes in CAD-supported breast screening by analysing how prompts affect readers’ judgements of individual mammographic features (lesions). To this end we analysed hitherto unexamined details of reports completed by mammogram readers in an earlier evaluation of a CAD tool. Material and methods: Assessments of lesions were extracted from 5,839 reports for 59 cancer cases. Statistical analyses of these data focused on what features readers considered when recalling a cancer case and how readers reacted to CAD prompts. Results: About 13.5% of recall decisions were found to be caused by responses to features other than those indicating actual cancer. Effects of CAD: lesions were more likely to be examined if prompted; the presence of a prompt on a cancer increased the probability of both detection and recall especially for less accurate readers in subtler cases; lack of prompts made cancer features less likely to be detected; false prompts made non-cancer features more likely to be classified as cancer. Conclusion: The apparent lack of impact reported for CAD in some studies is plausibly due to CAD systematically affecting readers’ identification of individual features, in a beneficial way for certain combinations of readers and features and a damaging way for others. Mammogram readers do not ignore prompts. Methodologically, assessing CAD by numbers of recalled cancer cases may be misleading

Recommendations for triage, prioritization and treatment of breast cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic

The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) associated disease (COVID-19) outbreak seriously challenges globally all health care systems and professionals. Expert projections estimate that despite social distancing and lockdown being practiced, we have yet to feel the full impact of COVID-19. In this manuscript we provide guidance to prepare for the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on breast cancer patients and advise on how to triage, prioritize and organize diagnostic procedures, surgical, radiation and medical treatments

Using patient management as a surrogate for patient health outcomes in diagnostic test evaluation

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Before a new test is introduced in clinical practice, evidence is needed to demonstrate that its use will lead to improvements in patient health outcomes. Studies reporting test accuracy may not be sufficient, and clinical trials of tests that measure patient health outcomes are rarely feasible. Therefore, the consequences of testing on patient management are often investigated as an intermediate step in the pathway. There is a lack of guidance on the interpretation of this evidence, and patient management studies often neglect a discussion of the limitations of measuring patient management as a surrogate for health outcomes.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We discuss the rationale for measuring patient management, describe the common study designs and provide guidance about how this evidence should be reported.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Interpretation of patient management studies relies on the condition that patient management is a valid surrogate for downstream patient benefits. This condition presupposes two critical assumptions: the test improves diagnostic accuracy; and the measured changes in patient management improve patient health outcomes. The validity of this evidence depends on the certainty around these critical assumptions and the ability of the study design to minimise bias. Three common designs are test RCTs that measure patient management as a primary endpoint, diagnostic before-after studies that compare planned patient management before and after testing, and accuracy studies that are extended to report on the actual treatment or further tests received following a positive and negative test result.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Patient management can be measured as a surrogate outcome for test evaluation if its limitations are recognised. The potential consequences of a positive and negative test result on patient management should be pre-specified and the potential patient benefits of these management changes clearly stated. Randomised comparisons will provide higher quality evidence about differences in patient management using the new test than observational studies. Regardless of the study design used, the critical assumption that patient management is a valid surrogate for downstream patient benefits or harms must be discussed in these studies.</p

How I report breast magnetic resonance imaging studies for breast cancer staging and screening

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the breast is the most sensitive imaging technique for the diagnosis and local staging of primary breast cancer and yet, despite the fact that it has been in use for 20 years, there is little evidence that its widespread uncritical adoption has had a positive impact on patient-related outcomes. This has been attributed previously to the low specificity that might be expected with such a sensitive modality, but with modern techniques and protocols, the specificity and positive predictive value for malignancy can exceed that of breast ultrasound and mammography. A more likely explanation is that historically, clinicians have acted on MRI findings and altered surgical plans without prior histological confirmation. Furthermore, modern adjuvant therapy for breast cancer has improved so much that it has become a very tall order to show a an improvement in outcomes such as local recurrence rates. In order to obtain clinically useful information, it is necessary to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the technique and the physiological processes reflected in breast MRI. An appropriate indication for the scan, proper patient preparation and good scan technique, with rigorous quality assurance, are all essential prerequisites for a diagnostically relevant study. The use of recognised descriptors from a standardised lexicon is helpful, since assessment can then dictate subsequent recommendations for management, as in the American College of Radiology BI-RADS (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System) lexicon (Morris et al., ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, 2013). It also enables audit of the service. However, perhaps the most critical factor in the generation of a meaningful report is for the reporting radiologist to have a thorough understanding of the clinical question and of the findings that will influence management. This has never been more important than at present, when we are in the throes of a remarkable paradigm shift in the treatment of both early stage and locally advanced breast cancer. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40644-016-0078-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users