The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer largely rely on the identification and clinical management of individuals with a pathogenic variant prior to developing cancer. Simulation modelling is commonly utilised to evaluate genetic testing strategies due to its ability to synthesise collections of data and extrapolate over long time periods and large populations. Existing genetic testing simulation models use simplifying assumptions for predictive genetic testing and risk management uptake, which could impact the reliability of their estimates.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBackground: BreastScreen Australia, the population mammographic screening program for breast cancer, uses two-view digital screening mammography ± ultrasound followed by percutaneous biopsy to detect breast cancer. Secondary breast imaging for further local staging, not performed at BreastScreen, may identify additional clinically significant breast lesions. Staging options include further mammography, bilateral ultrasound, and/or contrast-based imaging (CBI) [magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM)].
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBreast Cancer Res Treat
November 2024
Purpose: Women with a personal history of breast cancer have an increased risk of subsequent breast malignancy and may benefit from more sensitive surveillance than conventional mammography (MG). We previously reported outcomes for first surveillance episode using contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM), demonstrating higher sensitivity and comparable specificity to MG. We now report CEM performance for subsequent surveillance.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPurpose: Shorter time from symptoms recognition to diagnosis and timely treatment would be expected to improve the survival of patients with breast cancer (BC). This review identifies and summarizes evidence on time to diagnosis and treatment, and associated factors to inform an improved BC care pathways in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs).
Methods: A systematic search was conducted in electronic databases including Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and Global Health, covering publications between January 1, 2010, and November 6, 2023.
Background: Quantifying the benefits and harms of breast cancer screening accurately is important for planning and evaluating screening programs and for enabling women to make informed decisions about participation. However, few cohort studies have attempted to estimate benefit and harm simultaneously.
Aims: We aimed to quantify the impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality and overdiagnosis using a cohort of women invited to attend Australia's national screening program, BreastScreen.
Purpose: Mammography (MG) is the standard imaging in surveillance of women with a personal history of breast cancer or DCIS (PHBC), supplemented with ultrasound. Contrast Enhanced Mammography (CEM) has higher sensitivity than MG and US. We report the performance of CEM compared with MG ± US.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBackground: The benefits and harms of breast screening may be better balanced through a risk-stratified approach. We conducted a systematic review assessing the accuracy of questionnaire-based risk assessment tools for this purpose.
Methods: Population: asymptomatic women aged ≥40 years; Intervention: questionnaire-based risk assessment tool (incorporating breast density and polygenic risk where available); Comparison: different tool applied to the same population; Primary outcome: breast cancer incidence; Scope: external validation studies identified from databases including Medline and Embase (period 1 January 2008-20 July 2021).
Objective: There is growing interest in more risk-based approaches to breast cancer screening in Australia. This would require more detailed reporting of BreastScreen data for factors of interest in the assessment and monitoring of risk-based screening. This review assesses the current and potential availability and reporting of BreastScreen data for this purpose.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPrev Med
October 2021
The COVID-19 pandemic affects mortality and morbidity, with disruptions expected to continue for some time, with access to timely cancer-related services a concern. For breast cancer, early detection and treatment is key to improved survival and longer-term quality of life. Health services generally have been strained and in many settings with population breast mammography screening, efforts to diagnose and treat breast cancers earlier have been paused or have had reduced capacity.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFOverdiagnosis is a harmful consequence of screening which is particularly challenging to estimate. An unbiased setting to measure overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening requires comparative data from a screened and an unscreened cohort for at least 30 years. Such randomised data will not become available, leaving us with observational data over shorter time periods and outcomes of modelling.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused major disruptions to many aspects of life in Australia and globally. This includes actual and potential future impacts on Australia's three national screening programs for breast, bowel and cervical cancer. These programs aim to improve cancer outcomes through an organised approach to the early detection of cancer and precancer in asymptomatic populations.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF:Although evaluations of breast cancer screening programs frequently estimate quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) losses by stage, other breast cancer characteristics influence treatment and vary by mode of detection - i.e. whether the cancer is detected through screening (screen-detected), between screening rounds (interval-detected) or outside screening (community-detected).
View Article and Find Full Text PDFMammographic density (MD) influences breast cancer risk, but how this is mediated is unknown. Molecular differences between breast cancers arising in the context of the lowest and highest quintiles of mammographic density may identify the mechanism through which MD drives breast cancer development. Women diagnosed with invasive or in situ breast cancer where MD measurement was also available ( = 842) were identified from the Lifepool cohort of >54,000 women participating in population-based mammographic screening.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFObjective: To determine the government and out-of-pocket community costs (out-of-hospital medical services and prescription medicines) associated with screen-detected and community-detected cancers (i.e. cancers detected outside of Australia's organised screening program [BreastScreen]).
View Article and Find Full Text PDFIntroduction: For women of the same age and body mass index, increased mammographic density is one of the strongest predictors of breast cancer risk. There are multiple methods of measuring mammographic density and other features in a mammogram that could potentially be used in a screening setting to identify and target women at high risk of developing breast cancer. However, it is unclear which measurement method provides the strongest predictor of breast cancer risk.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBackground: Mammographic screening reduces breast cancer mortality but may lead to the overdiagnosis and overtreatment of low-risk breast cancers. Conservative management may reduce the potential harm of overtreatment, yet little is known about the impact upon quality of life.
Objectives: To quantify women's preferences for managing low-risk screen detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), including the acceptability of active monitoring as an alternative treatment.
Introduction: There are three government-funded population-based screening programs in Australia - the national breast cancer screening program (BreastScreen Australia), the National Cervical Screening Program (NCSP), and the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP). Options for early detection of other cancers (e.g.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPublic Health Res Pract
July 2019
There are currently no single disruptors to breast cancer screening akin to the impact of human papillomavirus testing and vaccination on cervical cancer screening. However, there is a groundswell of interest to review the BreastScreen Australia program to consider more risk-based screening protocols and to establish whether to routinely inform women about their breast density. We propose a framework for a considered, evidence-based review.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBackground: Characteristics of mammographic density for Chinese women are understudied. This study aims to identify factors associated with mammographic density in China using a quantitative method.
Methods: Mammographic density was measured for a total of 1071 (84 with and 987 without breast cancer) women using an automatic algorithm AutoDensity.
Policy decisions regarding breast cancer screening and treatment programmes may be misplaced unless the decision process includes the appropriate utilities and disutilities of mammography screening and its sequelae. The objectives of this study were to critically review how economic evaluations have valued the health states associated with breast cancer screening, and appraise the primary evidence informing health state utility values (cardinal measures of quality of life). A systematic review was conducted up to September 2018 of studies that elicited or used utilities relevant to mammography screening.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBreast cancer (BC) diagnosed after a negative mammogram but prior to the next screening episode is termed an 'interval BC' (IBC). Understanding the molecular differences between IBC and screen-detected BCs (SDBC) could improve mammographic screening and management options. Therefore, we assessed both germline and somatic genomic aberrations in a prospective cohort.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF