Impact of Henda's law on the utilization of screening breast magnetic resonance imaging

Automatic mammographic breast density classification in Chinese women: clinical validation of a deep learning model

BACKGROUND

High breast density is a strong risk factor for breast cancer. As such, high consistency and accuracy in breast density assessment is necessary.

PURPOSE

To validate our proposed deep learning (DL) model and explore its impact on radiologists on density assessments.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 3732 mammographic cases were collected as a validated set: 1686 cases before the implementation of the DL model and 2046 cases after the DL model. Five radiologists were divided into two groups (junior and senior groups) to assess all mammograms using either two- or four-category evaluation. Linear-weighted kappa (K) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) statistics were used to analyze the consistency between radiologists before and after implementation of the DL model.

RESULTS

The accuracy and clinical acceptance of the DL model for the junior group were 96.3% and 96.8% for two-category evaluation, and 85.6% and 89.6% for four-category evaluation, respectively. For the senior group, the accuracy and clinical acceptance were 95.5% and 98.0% for two-category evaluation, and 84.3% and 95.3% for four-category evaluation, respectively. The consistency within the junior group, the senior group, and among all radiologists improved with the help of the DL model. For two-category, their K and ICC values improved to 0.81, 0.81, and 0.80 from 0.73, 0.75, and 0.76. And for four-category, their K and ICC values improved to 0.81, 0.82, and 0.82 from 0.73, 0.79, and 0.78, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The DL model showed high accuracy and clinical acceptance in breast density categories. It is helpful to improve radiologists' consistency.

Physicians' perceptions of breast density notification laws and appropriate patient follow-up

Breast density notification laws have been adopted in the absence of consistent guidelines for post-notification follow-up. This can lead to inconsistent and potentially deficient management of women's health due to inconsistent physician practices. We examined physicians' knowledge and practices regarding follow-up for patients who receive density notifications. Physicians who referred patients to a Michigan hospital network for screening mammograms were recruited to participate in survey study; 105 (29.8%) responded. The survey assessed physicians' demographics, knowledge, and awareness of breast density and breast cancer risk and of density notification laws, and perceptions of appropriate follow-up behaviors for their patients who received density notifications. Most physicians (75%) knew about the notification law, and they were generally comfortable responding to breast density questions and deciding on follow-up. Most indicated that additional breast imaging (68.0%), followed by assessing breast cancer risk (24.7%) were appropriate follow-up responses. Physicians who performed breast cancer risk assessments, and who were more comfortable with breast density questions and follow-up decision making, were more likely to propose additional imaging. Male physicians were less likely to propose assessing breast cancer risk, and less likely to propose clinical and/or breast self-examinations. Divergence between practice and guidelines when it comes to supplemental breast cancer screening, coupled with density notification language that promotes additional screening in the absence of consistent evidence, remains concerning. Improved understanding of how density notification recipients and their physicians make decisions about supplemental screening is warranted to ensure that breast cancer risk is properly considered.

The impact of mandatory mammographic breast density notification on supplemental screening practice in the United States: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Dense breast tissue is an independent risk factor for breast cancer and lowers the sensitivity of screening mammography. Supplemental screening with ultrasound or MRI improves breast cancer detection rate but has potential harms. Breast density notification (BDN) legislation has been introduced in the United States (US) and its impact on supplemental screening practice is unclear. This study systematically reviewed current evidence to explore the impact of BDN on supplemental screening practice in the US.

METHODS

Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and the Cinhal Library databases were searched (2009-August 2020). Studies were assessed for eligibility, data were extracted and summarised, and study quality was evaluated.

RESULTS

Evidence from the included studies (n = 14) predominantly showed that BDN legislation increased the overall utilisation of supplemental screening by 0.5-143%. This effect was amplified if the notification included a follow-up telephone call informing women about additional screening benefits, and if the state's law mandated insurance cover for supplemental screening. Likelihood of supplemental screening was also influenced by history of breast biopsy and family history of breast cancer, race, age, socioeconomic status, density category, and physician's specialty and region. Some studies reported increases in biopsy rate (up to 4%) and cancer detection rate (up to 11%) after implementation of BDN legislation.

CONCLUSION

BDN leads to increased use of supplemental screening. This has implications for women and the health system. These findings can help inform current and future screening programs, where breast density notification is currently implemented or being considered.

Radiologic Technologist and Radiologist Knowledge Gaps about Breast Density Revealed by an Online Continuing Education Course

OBJECTIVE

We sought to identify provider knowledge gaps and their predictors, as revealed by a breast density continuing education course marketed to the radiology community.

METHODS

The course, continually available online during the study period of November 2, 2016 and December 31, 2018, includes demographics collection; a monograph on breast density, breast cancer risk, and screening; and a post-test. Four post-test questions were modified during the study period, resulting in different sample sizes pre- and postmodification. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify predictors of knowledge gaps (defined as > 25% of responses incorrect).

RESULTS

Of 1649 analyzable registrants, 1363 (82.7%) were radiologic technologists, 226 (13.7%) were physicians, and 60 (3.6%) were other nonphysicians; over 90% of physicians and over 90% of technologists/nonphysicians specialized in radiology. Sixteen of 49 physicians (32.7%) and 80/233 (34.3%) technologists/nonphysicians mistakenly thought the Gail model should be used to determine "high-risk" status for recommending MRI or genetic testing. Ninety-nine of 226 (43.8%) physicians and 682/1423 (47.9%) technologists/nonphysicians misunderstood the inverse relationship between increasing age and lifetime breast cancer risk. Fifty-two of 166 (31.3%) physicians and 549/1151 (47.7%) technologists/nonphysicians were unaware that MRI should be recommended for women with a family history of BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations. Tomosynthesis effectiveness was overestimated, with 18/60 (30.0%) physicians and 95/272 (34.9%) technologists/nonphysicians believing sensitivity nearly equaled MRI. Knowledge gaps were more common in technologists/nonphysicians.

CONCLUSIONS

Important knowledge gaps about breast density, breast cancer risk assessment, and screening exist among radiologic technologists and radiologists. Continued education efforts may improve appropriate breast cancer screening recommendations.

Supplemental Breast Imaging Utilization After Breast Density Legislation in North Carolina

PURPOSE

Breast density notification laws are increasingly common but little is known of how they affect supplemental screening use. The aim of this study was to investigate supplemental screening before and after density notification in North Carolina, where notification has been required since 2014.

METHODS

Breast screening data from Carolina Mammography Registry participants aged 40 to 79 years with no personal histories of breast cancer or breast implants were evaluated. Supplemental screening was defined as a nondiagnostic digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), whole-breast ultrasound, or breast MRI performed within 3 months of negative or benign results on screening mammography (2-D or DBT). Supplemental screening before (2012-2013) and after (2014-2016) the notification law was compared using logistic regression.

RESULTS

During the study period, 78,967 women underwent 145,279 index screening mammographic examinations. Supplemental screening use was similar before and after the notification law, regardless of breast density (dense breasts: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-1.75; nondense breasts: aOR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.38-1.04). Although there was no change in supplemental screening, new use of any screening DBT from 2014 to 2016 was greater for women with dense breasts (versus nondense breasts; aOR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.08-1.23).

CONCLUSIONS

Data suggest that supplemental screening use in North Carolina did not change after enactment of a breast density notification law, though the increase in new use of any screening DBT was greater for women with dense breasts. The short-term lack of change in supplemental screening should be considered as additional notification laws are developed.

The Impact of Breast Density Notification Laws on Supplemental Breast Imaging and Breast Biopsy

BACKGROUND

Dense breast tissue increases breast cancer risk and lowers mammography sensitivity, but the value of supplemental imaging for dense breasts remains uncertain. Since 2009, 37 states and Washington DC have passed legislation requiring patient notification about breast density.

OBJECTIVE

Examine the effects of state breast density notification laws on use of supplemental breast imaging and breast biopsies.

DESIGN

Difference-in-differences analysis of supplemental imaging and biopsies before and after notification laws in 12 states enacting breast density notification laws from 2009 to 2014 and 12 matched control states. Supplemental imaging/biopsy within 6 months following an index mammogram were evaluated during four time periods related to legislation: (1) 6 months before, (2) 0-6 months after, (3) 6-12 months after, and (4) 12-18 months after.

PARTICIPANTS

Women ages 40-64 years receiving an initial mammogram in a state that passed a breast density notification law or a control state.

INTERVENTION

Mandatory breast density notification following an index mammogram.

MAIN MEASURES

Use of breast biopsies and supplemental breast imaging (breast ultrasound, tomosynthesis, magnetic resonance imaging, scintimammography, and thermography), overall and by specific test.

KEY RESULTS

Supplemental breast imaging and biopsy increased modestly in states with notification laws and changed minimally in control states. Adjusted rates of supplemental imaging and biopsy within 6 months of mammography before legislation were 8.5% and 3.1%, respectively. Compared with pre-legislation in intervention and control states, legislation was associated with adjusted difference-in-differences estimates of + 1.3% (p < 0.0001) and + 0.4% (p < 0.0001) for supplemental imaging and biopsies, respectively, in the 6-12 months after the law and difference-in-differences estimates of + 3.3% (p < 0.0001) and + 0.8% (p < 0.0001) for supplemental imaging and biopsies, respectively, 12-18 months after the law.

CONCLUSIONS

As breast density notification laws are considered, policymakers and clinicians should expect increases in breast imaging/biopsies. Additional research is needed on these laws' effects on cost and patient outcomes.

Impact of the California Breast Density Law on Screening Breast MR Utilization, Provider Ordering Practices, and Patient Demographics

PURPOSE

To assess the impact of California's Breast Density Law (BDL) on MRI utilization and clinician ordering practices.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Our institutional review board approved this study that retrospectively compared the ordering pattern for screening breast MRI examinations in the 30-month period before and after the BDL was enacted. Examinations were subcategorized into those with breast density mentioned as an examination indication. Patients were classified into (1) high risk; (2) above average risk, defined but not quantified; and (3) undefined or average risk. χ² test or Fisher's exact test was used to compare MRI utilization, use of breast density as an indication, patient demographics, and provider characteristics.

RESULTS

Screening MRI examinations with breast density as the indication increased from 8.5% (32 of 376) to 21.1% (136 of 646, P < .0001) after BDL. When high-risk patients were excluded, the increase was from 8% to 17.2% (P < .0001). Patient demographics before and after BDL were, by race: white 71.8% versus 71.2%; Asian 6.4% versus 10.5%; black 3.7% versus 3.1%; American Indian 0.3% versus 1.4%; Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 1.6% versus 1.7%; by ethnicity: Hispanic or Latino 10.6% versus 7.9%. Before and after BDL, predominantly female providers (81.4% and 77.4%, P = not significant [NS]) and specialists (62.5% and 63.5%, P = NS) ordered the majority of breast MRI examinations compared with males (18.6% and 22.6%, P = NS).

CONCLUSION

Screening breast MRI utilization for non-high-risk women more than doubled after the California BDL went into effect. BDL has had an impact on MRI utilization, and its clinical value for changing outcomes deserves further study.

Between-Race Differences in Supplemental Breast Cancer Screening Before and After Breast Density Notification Law

Guidelines recommend supplemental breast cancer screening for women at increased breast cancer risk; however, the passage of breast density notification laws may lead to supplemental screening that is incongruent with women's risk. We examined supplemental screening (ie, MRI, ultrasound, or tomosynthesis within 6 months of screening mammogram) among a sample of 2,764 African American (AA) and 691 European American (EA) women with negative or benign screening mammograms for whom we had data from both before and after implementation of breast density notification laws in the state of Michigan. Results indicated a 5-fold increase (from 0.14% to 0.7% of women) in supplemental screening among screen-negative women after passage of the law, driven in large part by an increase in supplemental screening among AA women. Breast density was more predictive of supplemental screening and had a marginally greater explanatory role in between-race differences in supplemental screening after passage of the law. Subgroup analyses (n = 250) indicated that whereas 5-year breast cancer risk was positively associated with supplemental screening before the law and negatively associated after the law for EA women, 5-year risk was not associated with supplemental screening either before or after passage of the law for AA women. Our findings suggest that whereas passage of the breast density notification laws may have motivated supplemental screening among AA women in particular, it lessened the consideration of breast cancer risk in supplemental screening decision making.

The impact of legislation mandating breast density notification - Review of the evidence

Breast density (BD) is an independent risk factor for breast cancer and reduces the sensitivity of mammography. The enactment of BD legislation in a majority of states in the USA mandating notification of risks associated with BD directly to women undergoing mammography has catapulted interest in BD among women, physicians, and policymakers. We therefore report a descriptive review of the evidence on the impact of enactment of BD legislation. Based on 22 eligible studies, we identified four broad themes of research: studies of the impact on screening rates, most showing increased utilisation of supplemental screening; studies exploring the effect on women, radiologists, or primary physicians (reporting heterogeneous effects on knowledge, awareness, perceptions, attitudes and behaviour; and changes in practice); few studies assessing the population impact (effect on screening outcomes or breast cancer stage); and studies of costs highlighting the economic burden from supplemental screening. Given that many of the studies were retrospective single institution studies (comparing pre- and post-legislation) or small surveys with a paucity of population-level studies, we highlight areas meriting additional research. The information described in this review can inform research priorities where BD legislation has been introduced and can be used to guide world-wide policy or practice decisions where BD legislation may be under debate or contemplation.

High mammographic density in women is associated with protumor inflammation

Background

Epidemiological studies have consistently shown that increased mammographic density (MD) is a strong risk factor for breast cancer. We previously observed an elevated number of vimentin⁺/CD45⁺ leukocytes in high MD (HMD) epithelium. In the present study, we aimed to investigate the subtypes of immune cell infiltrates in HMD and low MD (LMD) breast tissue.

Methods

Fifty-four women undergoing prophylactic mastectomy at Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre or St. Vincent’s Hospital were enrolled. Upon completion of mastectomy, HMD and LMD areas were resected under radiological guidance in collaboration with BreastScreen Victoria and were subsequently fixed, processed, and sectioned. Fifteen paired HMD and LMD specimens were further selected according to their fibroglandular characteristics (reasonable amount [> 20%] of tissue per block on H&E stains) for subsequent IHC analysis of immune cell infiltration.

Results

Overall, immune cell infiltrates were predominantly present in breast ducts and lobules rather than in the stroma, with CD68⁺ macrophages and CD20⁺ B lymphocytes also surrounding the vasculature. Macrophages, dendritic cells (DCs), B lymphocytes, and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) expression were significantly increased in HMD epithelium compared with LMD. Moreover, significantly higher levels of DCs, CD4⁺ T cells, and PD-1 were also observed in HMD stroma than in LMD stroma. The increased expression of interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-4, with unaltered interferon-γ, indicate a proinflammatory microenvironment.

Conclusions

Our work indicates that the immune system may be activated very early in breast cancer development and may in part underpin the breast cancer risk associated with HMD.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13058-018-1010-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Social Network Structures of Breast Cancer Patients and the Contributing Role of Patient Navigators

BACKGROUND

Minority women in the U.S. continue to experience inferior breast cancer outcomes compared with white women, in part due to delays in care delivery. Emerging cancer care delivery models like patient navigation focus on social barriers, but evidence demonstrating how these models increase social capital is lacking. This pilot study describes the social networks of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients and explores the contributing role of patient navigators.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-five women completed a one hour interview about their social networks related to cancer care support. Network metrics identified important structural attributes and influential individuals. Bivariate associations between network metrics, type of network, and whether the network included a navigator were measured. Secondary analyses explored associations between network structures and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified three types of networks: kin-based, role and/or affect-based, or heterogeneous. Network metrics did not vary significantly by network type. There was a low prevalence of navigators included in the support networks (25%). Network density scores were significantly higher in those networks without a navigator. Network metrics were not predictive of clinical outcomes in multivariate models.

CONCLUSION

Patient navigators were not frequently included in support networks, but provided distinctive types of support. If navigators can identify patients with poorly integrated (less dense) social networks, or who have unmet tangible support needs, the intensity of navigation services could be tailored. Services and systems that address gaps and variations in patient social networks should be explored for their potential to reduce cancer health disparities.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This study used a new method to identify the breadth and strength of social support following a diagnosis of breast cancer, especially examining the role of patient navigators in providing support. While navigators were only included in one quarter of patient support networks, they did provide essential supports to some individuals. Health care providers and systems need to better understand the contributions of social supports both within and outside of health care to design and tailor interventions that seek to reduce health care disparities and improve cancer outcomes.

The Effect of California's Breast Density Notification Legislation on Breast Cancer Screening

Purpose: Half of US states mandate women be notified if they have dense breasts on their mammogram, yet guidelines and data on supplemental screening modalities are limited. Breast density (BD) refers to the extent that breast tissue appears radiographically dense on mammograms. High BD reduces the sensitivity of screening mammography and increases breast cancer risk. The aim of this study was to determine the potential impact of California’s 2013 BD notification legislation on breast cancer screening patterns. Methods: We conducted a cohort study of women aged 40 to 74 years who were members of a large Northern California integrated health plan (approximately 3.9 million members) in 2011-2015. We calculated pre- and post-legislation rates of screening mammography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). We also examined whether women with dense breasts (defined as BI-RADS density c or d) had higher MRI rates than women with nondense breasts (defined as BI-RADS density a or b). Results: After adjustment for race/ethnicity, age, body mass index, medical facility, neighborhood median income, and cancer history, there was a relative 6.6% decrease (relative risk [RR] 0.934, confidence interval [CI] 0.92-0.95) in the rate of screening mammography, largely driven by a decrease among women <50 years. While infrequent, there was a relative 16% increase (RR 1.16, CI 1.07-1.25) in the rate of screening MRI, with the greatest increase among the youngest women. In the postlegislation period, women with extremely dense breasts (BI-RADS d) had 2.77 times (CI 1.93-3.95) the odds of a MRI within 9 months of a screening mammogram compared with women with nondense breasts (BI-RADS b). Conclusions: In this setting, MRI rates increased in the postlegislation period. In addition, women with higher BD were more likely to have supplementary MRI. The decrease in mammography rates seen primarily among younger women may have been due to changes in national screening guidelines.