The current status of risk-stratified breast screening

Deep Learning vs Traditional Breast Cancer Risk Models to Support Risk-Based Mammography Screening

BACKGROUND

Deep learning breast cancer risk models demonstrate improved accuracy compared with traditional risk models but have not been prospectively tested. We compared the accuracy of a deep learning risk score derived from the patient's prior mammogram to traditional risk scores to prospectively identify patients with cancer in a cohort due for screening.

METHODS

We collected data on 119 139 bilateral screening mammograms in 57 617 consecutive patients screened at 5 facilities between September 18, 2017, and February 1, 2021. Patient demographics were retrieved from electronic medical records, cancer outcomes determined through regional tumor registry linkage, and comparisons made across risk models using Wilcoxon and Pearson χ2 2-sided tests. Deep learning, Tyrer-Cuzick, and National Cancer Institute Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (NCI BCRAT) risk models were compared with respect to performance metrics and area under the receiver operating characteristic curves.

RESULTS

Cancers detected per thousand patients screened were higher in patients at increased risk by the deep learning model (8.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 7.9 to 9.4) compared with Tyrer-Cuzick (4.4, 95% CI = 3.9 to 4.9) and NCI BCRAT (3.8, 95% CI = 3.3 to 4.3) models (P < .001). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curves of the deep learning model (0.68, 95% CI = 0.66 to 0.70) was higher compared with Tyrer-Cuzick (0.57, 95% CI = 0.54 to 0.60) and NCI BCRAT (0.57, 95% CI = 0.54 to 0.60) models. Simulated screening of the top 50th percentile risk by the deep learning model captured statistically significantly more patients with cancer compared with Tyrer-Cuzick and NCI BCRAT models (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

A deep learning model to assess breast cancer risk can support feasible and effective risk-based screening and is superior to traditional models to identify patients destined to develop cancer in large screening cohorts.

Personalized Approaches for the Prevention and Treatment of Breast Cancer

Breast cancer (BC) remains a major public health issue worldwide [...]

Proposal of an automated tumor-stromal ratio assessment algorithm and a nomogram for prognosis in early-stage invasive breast cancer

BACKGROUND

The tumor-stromal ratio (TSR) has been verified to be a prognostic factor in many solid tumors. In most studies, it was manually assessed on routinely stained H&E slides. This study aimed to assess the TSR using image analysis algorithms developed by the Qupath software, and integrate the TSR into a nomogram for prediction of the survival in invasive breast cancer (BC) patients.

METHODS

A modified TSR assessment algorithm based on the recognition of tumor and stroma tissues was developed using the Qupath software. The TSR of 234 invasive BC specimens in H&E-stained tissue microarrays (TMAs) were assessed with the algorithm and categorized as stroma-low or stroma-high. The consistency of TSR estimation between Qupath prediction and pathologist annotation was analyzed. Univariable and multivariable analyses were applied to select potential risk factors and a nomogram for predicting survival in invasive BC patients was constructed and validated. An extra TMA containing 110 specimens was obtained to validate the conclusion as an independent cohort.

RESULTS

In the discovery cohort, stroma-low and stroma-high were identified in 43.6% and 56.4% cases, respectively. Good concordance was observed between the pathologist annotated and Qupath predicted TSR. The Kaplan-Meier curve showed that stroma-high patients were associated with worse 5-DFS compared to stroma-low patients (p = 0.007). Multivariable analysis identified age, T stage, N status, histological grade, ER status, HER-2 gene, and TSR as potential risk predictors, which were included in the nomogram. The nomogram was well calibrated and showed a favorable predictive value for the recurrence of BC. Kaplan-Meier curves showed that the nomogram had a better risk stratification capability than the TNM staging system. In the external validation of the nomogram, the results were further validated.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on H&E-stained TMAs, this study successfully developed image analysis algorithms for TSR assessment and constructed a nomogram for predicting survival in invasive BC.

Towards implementation of comprehensive breast cancer risk prediction tools in health care for personalised prevention

Advances in knowledge about breast cancer risk factors have led to the development of more comprehensive risk models. These integrate information on a variety of risk factors such as lifestyle, genetics, family history, and breast density. These risk models have the potential to deliver more personalised breast cancer prevention. This is through improving accuracy of risk estimates, enabling more effective targeting of preventive options and creating novel prevention pathways through enabling risk estimation in a wider variety of populations than currently possible. The systematic use of risk tools as part of population screening programmes is one such example. A clear understanding of how such tools can contribute to the goal of personalised prevention can aid in understanding and addressing barriers to implementation. In this paper we describe how emerging models, and their associated tools can contribute to the goal of personalised healthcare for breast cancer through health promotion, early disease detection (screening) and improved management of women at higher risk of disease. We outline how addressing specific challenges on the level of communication, evidence, evaluation, regulation, and acceptance, can facilitate implementation and uptake.

The future of early cancer detection

A proactive approach to detecting cancer at an early stage can make treatments more effective, with fewer side effects and improved long-term survival. However, as detection methods become increasingly sensitive, it can be difficult to distinguish inconsequential changes from lesions that will lead to life-threatening cancer. Progress relies on a detailed understanding of individualized risk, clear delineation of cancer development stages, a range of testing methods with optimal performance characteristics, and robust evaluation of the implications for individuals and society. In the future, advances in sensors, contrast agents, molecular methods, and artificial intelligence will help detect cancer-specific signals in real time. To reduce the burden of cancer on society, risk-based detection and prevention needs to be cost effective and widely accessible.