Defining clinicopathological and radiological features of breast cancer in women under the age of 35: an epidemiological study

Davey, Matthew G; Brennan, Michael J.; Ryan, Éanna J; Corbett, Mel; Elwahab, Sami Abd; Walsh, S.; McLaughlin, R.

doi:10.1007/s11845-020-02229-z

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is particularly prudent for TNBC, and the inherent threat and aggressive natural history of TNBC is irrefutable in surgical and medicooncological literature [65]. MMG remains the standard diagnostic tool in worldwide breast cancer screening programmes, with screening mammography performed 38 million times per annum in the United States according to the Mammography Quality Standards Act and Program [66], as well as diagnostic sensitivity and specificity rates in excess of 85% [67]. Thus, the authors wish to emphasise the present role of MMG as a robust diagnostic test, with critical value in settings of diagnostics and breast cancer screening, while highlighting the potential of this modality to facilitate the expedition of early breast cancer molecular substratification, following radiological diagnosis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiomic differentiation of breast cancer molecular subtypes using pre-operative breast imaging – A systematic review and meta-analysis

Davey

Boland

et al. 2021

European Journal of Radiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Breast cancer has four distinct molecular subtypes which are discriminated using gene expression profiling following biopsy. Radiogenomics is an emerging field which utilises diagnostic imaging to reveal genomic properties of disease. We aimed to perform a systematic review of the current literature to evaluate the value radiomics in differentiating breast cancers into their molecular subtypes using diagnostic imaging. Methods: A systematic review was performed as per PRISMA guidelines. Studies assessing radiomic tumour analysis in differentiating breast cancer molecular subtypes were included. Quality was assessed using the radiomics quality score (RQS). Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of radiomic analyses were included for metaanalysis; Study specific sensitivity and specificity were retrieved and summary ROC analysis were performed to compile pooled sensitivities and specificities. Results: Forty-one studies were included. Overall, there were 10,090 female patients (mean age of 47.6 ± 11.7 years, range: 21 -93) and molecular subtype was reported in 7,693 of cases, with Luminal A (LABC), Luminal B (LBBC), Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-2 overexpressing (HER2+), and Triple Negative (TNBC) breast cancers representing 51.3%, 19.9%, 12.3% and 16.3% of tumour respectively. Seven studies provided radiomic analysis to determine molecular subtypes using mammography to differentiate TNBC vs.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiomic differentiation of breast cancer molecular subtypes using pre-operative breast imaging – A systematic review and meta-analysis

Davey

Boland

et al. 2021

European Journal of Radiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Breast Cancer in women of young age remains a great challenge to patients, families, and healthcare providers. In spite of the fact that the diagnosis of BC is less common in women under 40, it can still have a larger effect than it is in older ones, as it is likely to appear at a later stage, having aggressive features [ 7 , 8 ] and more aggressive treatment, chemotherapy and mastectomy, than patients in their forties [ 9 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Breast Cancer Knowledge and Practice of Breast Self-Examination among Female University Students, Gaza

Al-Shiekh

Ibrahim

Alajerami

2021

The Scientific World Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Breast cancer is the highest public detected cancer among female population in the majority of countries worldwide. Breast self-examination (BSE) is a useful screening tool to empower women and raise awareness about their breast tissues and help detect any breast abnormalities when they occur. This study aimed to assess the level of female university students’ knowledge and practice of BSE. A self-administered questionnaire was used to assess the knowledge about breast cancer and related items, and an observation checklist was used to test practicing BSE using a breast simulator. Eighty-six students participated in the study, 58.1% studying nursing and 41.9% studying clinical nutrition in the third (40.7%) or the fourth level (59.3%). Of them, 24.4% had previous family history of breast cancer. The majority of the students (80.2%) had previous information about breast cancer acquired from different sources, university studies (57%), the Internet (45%), and social media (41%). Findings showed good scores (≥70%) regarding signs and symptoms and risk factors of breast cancer; however, low knowledge scores (<70%) were detected regarding general knowledge about breast cancer disease, methods of early detection and management, and applying steps of practicing BSE. Roughly all the students (96.5%) have heard about BSE, and 69.8% knew the time to do BSE; however, only 31.4% practice it regularly. Three barriers to practice were dominant among students who do not have a breast problem (39.7%), do not know how to do it (37.9%), and being busy 31%. On the other hand, breast cancer early detection purpose and the presence of family history of breast cancer were considered facilitators to regular practice BSE. A statistically significant relationship existed between knowledge about the steps of applying the BSE and regular practicing. A training program should be implemented to increase the level of awareness about BC and practicing BSE.

show abstract

“…MMG is the conventional diagnostic imaging modality in breast cancer screening programs worldwide. It has sensitivity and specificity rates of over 85% [54]. Early detection of breast cancer reduces mortality rates, improves prognosis, and reduces overall disease burden.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiomics to Differentiate Malignant and Benign Breast Lesions: A Systematic Review and Diagnostic Test Accuracy Meta-Analysis

Oh,

Vasandani,

Anwar

2023

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Breast cancer is a prevalent global health concern, necessitating accurate diagnostic tools for effective management. Diagnostic imaging plays a pivotal role in breast cancer diagnosis, staging, treatment planning, and outcome evaluation. Radiomics is an emerging field of study in medical imaging that contains a broad set of computational methods to extract quantitative features from radiographic images. This can be utilized to guide diagnosis, treatment response, and prognosis in clinical settings.A systematic review was performed in concordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy. Quality was assessed using the radiomics quality score. Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of radiomics analysis, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were included for meta-analysis. The area under the curve analysis was recorded. An extensive statistical analysis was performed following the Cochrane guidelines. Statistical significance was determined if p-values were less than 0.05. Statistical analyses were conducted using Review Manager (RevMan), Version 5.4.1.A total of 31 manuscripts involving 8,773 patients were included, with 17 contributing to the meta-analysis. The cohort comprised 56.2% malignant breast cancers and 43.8% benign breast lesions. MRI demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.89-0.92) and a specificity of 0.84 (95% CI: 0.82-0.86) in differentiating between benign and malignant breast cancers. Mammography-based radiomic features predicted breast cancer subtype with a sensitivity of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.76-0.82) and a specificity of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.79-0.84). Ultrasound-based analysis yielded a sensitivity of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.90-0.94) and a specificity of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.83-0.88). Only one study reported the results of radiomic evaluation from CT, which had a sensitivity of 0.95 (95% CI: 0.88-0.99) and a specificity of 0.56 (95% CI: 0.45-0.67).Across different imaging modalities, radiomics exhibited robust diagnostic accuracy in differentiating benign and malignant breast lesions. The results underscore the potential of radiomic assessment as a minimally invasive alternative or adjunctive diagnostic tool for breast cancer. This is pioneering data that reports on a novel diagnostic approach that is understudied and underreported. However, due to study limitations, the complexity of this technology, and the need for future development, biopsy still remains the current gold standard method of determining breast cancer type.

show abstract

Defining clinicopathological and radiological features of breast cancer in women under the age of 35: an epidemiological study

Cited by 8 publications

References 37 publications

Radiomic differentiation of breast cancer molecular subtypes using pre-operative breast imaging – A systematic review and meta-analysis

Radiomic differentiation of breast cancer molecular subtypes using pre-operative breast imaging – A systematic review and meta-analysis

Breast Cancer Knowledge and Practice of Breast Self-Examination among Female University Students, Gaza

Radiomics to Differentiate Malignant and Benign Breast Lesions: A Systematic Review and Diagnostic Test Accuracy Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About