Study protocol comparing the ethical, psychological and socio-economic impact of personalised breast cancer screening to that of standard screening in the "My Personal Breast Screening" (MyPeBS) randomised clinical trial

Personalized screening based on risk and density: prevalence data from the RIBBS study

PURPOSE

To present the prevalence screening results of the RIsk-Based Breast Screening (RIBBS) study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05675085), a quasi-experimental population-based study evaluating a personalized screening model for women aged 45-49. This model uses digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and stratifies participants by risk and breast density, incorporating tailored screening intervals with or without supplemental imaging (ultrasound, US, and breast MRI), with the goal of reducing advanced breast cancer (BC) incidence compared to annual digital mammography (DM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An interventional cohort of 10,269 women aged 45 was enrolled (January 2020-December 2021. Participants underwent DBT and completed a BC risk questionnaire. Volumetric breast density and lifetime risk were used to assign five subgroups to tailored screening regimens: low-risk low-density (LR-LD), low-risk high-density (LR-HD), intermediate-risk low-density (IR-LD), intermediate-risk high-density (IR-HD), and high-risk (HR). Screening performance was compared with an observational control cohort of 43,838 women undergoing annual DM.

RESULTS

Compared to LR-LD, intermediate-risk groups showed a 4.9- (IR-LD) and 4.6-fold (IR-HD) higher prevalence of BC, driven by a 7.1- and 7.1-fold higher prevalence of pT1c tumors. The interventional cohort had lower recall rate (rate ratio, 0.5), higher surgery rate (1.9) and increased prevalence of DCIS (2.9), pT1c (2.3) and grade 3 tumors (2.4), compared to controls.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence screening demonstrated the feasibility of using DBT and -in high-density subgroups- supplemental US. The stratification criteria effectively identified subpopulations with different BC prevalence. Increasing the detection rate of pT1c tumors is not sufficient but necessary to achieve a reduction in advanced BC incidence.

Acceptability of risk-based breast cancer screening among professionals and healthcare providers from 6 countries contributing to the MyPeBS study

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the acceptability of a risk-based breast cancer screening (BCS) strategy among professionals involved in MyPeBS study in 6 countries.

METHODS

After qualitative interviews, a questionnaire was built with a Delphi method: to evaluate professionals' basic understanding, satisfaction and reactions to each stage of the trial, opinions on BCS and its future. The questionnaire was distributed by emailing 698 investigators, who forwarded it to all categories of professionals involved in trial recruitment (physicians, medical secretaries, nurses, and mammography technicians). Descriptive statistics were used to summarize views on acceptability.

RESULTS

Among the 198 respondents, most declared being at ease with the trial design and the concept of breast cancer risk estimation. They were mostly comfortable explaining the different trial steps, communicating risk estimation, and answering women's questions. Some professionals were not comfortable explaining high (7.1%) and low-risk categories (9%) and did not feel sufficiently trained (26.5%). Although professionals were mostly confident about risk-based approaches and the potential of this to improve breast cancer screening (93.5%), 58% called for further validation of the risk-models to predict risk before implementation in population-based programs. They expressed concerns about the complexity of this screening strategy, stressing the need to properly inform the public and to train professionals in delivering risk assessment.

CONCLUSION

This first study assessing the perspectives of professionals delivering risk-based BCS. As professional acceptability is key for successful implementation, training for all professionals and tools to help them communicate risk to women will be necessary to develop risk assessment in BCS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Study sponsor: Unicancer. My personalised breast screening (MyPeBS).

CLINICALTRIALS

gov (2018) available at https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ct2/show/NCT03672331 .

Barriers and Facilitators to Delivering Multifactorial Risk Assessment and Communication for Personalized Breast Cancer Screening: A Qualitative Study Exploring Implementation in Canada

Many jurisdictions are considering a shift to risk-stratified breast cancer screening; however, evidence on the feasibility of implementing it on a population scale is needed. We conducted a prospective cohort study in the PERSPECTIVE I&I project to produce evidence on risk-stratified breast screening and recruited 3753 participants to undergo multifactorial risk assessment from 2019-2021. This qualitative study explored the perspectives of study personnel on barriers and facilitators to delivering multifactorial risk assessment and risk communication. One focus group and three one-on-one interviews were conducted and a thematic analysis conducted which identified five themes: (1) barriers and facilitators to recruitment for multifactorial risk assessment, (2) barriers and facilitators to completion of the risk factor questionnaire, (3) additional resources required to implement multifactorial risk assessment, (4) the need for a person-centered approach, and (5) and risk literacy. While risk assessment and communication processes were successful overall, key barriers were identified including challenges with collecting comprehensive breast cancer risk factor information and limited resources to execute data collection and risk communication activities on a large scale. Risk assessment and communication processes will need to be optimized for large-scale implementation to ensure they are efficient but robust and person-centered.

Multilevel analysis of undergoing clinical breast examination and its associated factors among mothers of reproductive age in Kenya: Kenyan Demographic and Health Survey 2022

INTRODUCTION

Breast cancer is one of the most common public health concerns among women around the world. The incidence of breast cancer is increasing in all areas of the world. It is the first cause of death from malignant tumors. Breast cancer in Sub-Saharan African countries is the number one cancer and the leading cause of cancer mortality among women. In low-income countries like Kenya, early screening programs, including clinical breast examination by health professionals, can identify women's health status and risk of breast cancer. Therefore, this study was conducted to assess the uptake of clinical breast examination for cancer and to determine the associated factors among mothers of reproductive age.

METHODS

A total weighted sample of 10,267 mothers of reproductive age was included in this study. The data were taken from the recent Kenyan Demographic and Health Survey 2022. A multilevel multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify the associated factors associated with the uptake of clinical breast examination. In the multivariable multilevel analysis, the adjusted odds ratio (AOR) with a 95% CI was used to declare statistically significant associations with uptake among mothers of reproductive age in Kenya.

RESULTS

In Kenya, the overall prevalence of clinical breast examination uptake among mothers of reproductive age was 11.39%. In multilevel analysis, the significant factors associated with the uptake of clinical breast examination were the age of the mothers; age was significantly associated with the uptake of clinical breast examination; when compared with mothers aged 15-24 years, examination increased in those aged 25-34 years (AOR =  1.45; 95% CI (1.15-1.83)) and 34-49 years (AOR =  2.4; 95% CI (1.88-3.29)), when compared to no education, odds of examination increased in those with primary education (AOR =  2.0; 95% CI (1.19-3.37)) and secondary and higher (AOR =  2.67; 95% CI (1.56-4.57)), when compared to mothers who are unemployed, the odds of examination were higher among those who are employed (AOR =  1.42; 95% CI (1.16-1.74)), place of delivery; when compared to mothers who delivered at home, the odds of examination were higher among those who delivered at a health institution (AOR =  1.5; 95% CI (1.0-2.19)), when compared to those who are not exposed to television, odds of examination increased in those who were exposed to this form of media (AOR =  1.34; 95% CI (1.0-1.72)), when compared to those who travel on foot, odds of examination increased in those who used vehicles for transportation (AOR =  1.34; 95% CI (1.12-1.62)), and when compared to communities with a high level of literacy, the odds of examination increased in communities with a low level of literacy (AOR =  1.7; 95% CI (1.14-2.54)).

CONCLUSION

In Kenya, the uptake of clinical breast examinations among mothers of reproductive age remains low. To address this, policymakers and stakeholders need to prioritize breast cancer screening programs to reduce mortality rates. The factors identified in this study are crucial for developing strategies to enhance clinical breast examination services, facilitating early detection and treatment of breast cancer.

Breast cancer in Bulgaria prior implementation of a national breast cancer screening program and certified breast centers

INTRODUCTION

Breast cancer (BC) survival has improved globally in the past years. Eastern Europe is a region with lack of epidemiological data and traditionally lower BC overall survival (OS). We aimed to investigate the epidemiology of BC in Bulgaria between 2012 and 2022 and the readiness of the state for implementing population based organized screening program.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This is a retrospective study of 38 576 invasive BC cases registered in Bulgarian National Cancer Registry. We obtained data from publicly available sources - national institutes and regulatory agencies. We report descriptive statistics of distribution of cases and mammography units among the country and the compared survival of patient's groups.

RESULTS

75 % of patients are treated in the 9 biggest cities. They are younger, diagnosed earlier and have significantly better OS than the rest of the patients. Patients over 75 years represent 18.7 % of all. The 211 installed mammography systems can secure the implementation of organized BC screening.

DISCUSSION

The survival gap between cities can be due to the limited access to care of older patients living in smaller cities. The model of collaboration between private and state centers can be highly effective in implementing of organized screening since in Bulgaria both can be reimbursed by the National Insurance Fund.

CONCLUSION

Further centralization of care probably would not have such an impact on treatment outcomes as improvement and monitoring the quality of the provided treatment. Organized BC screening in Bulgaria is needed and technically possible step towards improving survival.

National yearly cost of breast cancer screening in the USA and projected cost of advocated guidelines: a simulation study with life table modelling

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to estimate the total national direct cost of breast cancer screening from 2019 to 2022 and project the total national cost and average lifetime cost of screening per woman for three current guidelines.

DESIGN

We estimated the national cost of screening from 2019 to 2022, and per cancer detected in 2022, using real-world data on the number of mammograms performed per year. We also projected the national cost of screening using life table modelling for three guidelines: 2021/2023 American College of Radiology (ACR), 2023 American Cancer Society (ACS) and 2024 United States Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF). The average lifetime cost to screen one woman until age 74 years with each guideline was also estimated. The Optum Labs Data Warehouse was used to estimate commercial and Medicare costs and recall rates. Sensitivity analyses were used to estimate uncertainty and determine which inputs had the largest impact on total national costs.

SETTING

This study was conducted for the USA.

PARTICIPANTS

Women eligible for breast cancer screening.

INTERVENTIONS

Digital mammograms (2D) or digital breast tomosynthesis (3D) and/or MRI.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Total national cost of screening calculated as the sum of screening and recall costs. Average lifetime cost of screening per woman until 74 years.

RESULTS

Nationally, screening cost approximately US$11 billion (B) per year from 2019 to 2022 with approximately 37% of eligible women screened each year. In 2022, screening cost US$55 471 per 3D-detected and US$44 000 per 2D-detected invasive or ductal carcinoma in situ case. Using target yearly participation rates of 54%-78% by age of women, the projected cost of screening was US$30B for ACR, US$18B for ACS and US$8B for USPSTF guidelines. The average lifetime cost to screen an average-risk woman was: US$13 416 for ACR, US$7946 for ACS and US$6931 for USPSTF. Participation rates, the proportion of women with a lifetime risk>20% and commercial MRI and 3D costs had the largest impact on total costs.

CONCLUSION

The cost of screening varies significantly by guideline (US$8B-US$30B) and was most influenced by participation rates, high-risk population proportions and technology costs. Future work can investigate whether risk-based screening strategies being tested in ongoing clinical trials can reduce national screening costs while improving outcomes.Cite Now.

Clinical utility and implementation of polygenic risk scores for predicting cardiovascular disease

Genome-wide association studies have revealed hundreds of genetic variants associated with cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Polygenic risk scores (PRS) can capture this information in a single metric and hold promise for use in CVD risk prediction. Importantly, PRS information can reflect the causally mediated risk to which the individual is exposed throughout life. Although European Society of Cardiology guidelines do not currently advocate their use in routine clinical practice, PRS are commercially available and increasingly sought by clinicians, health systems, and members of the public to inform personalized health care decision-making. This clinical consensus statement provides an overview of the scientific basis of PRS and evidence to date on their role in CVD risk prediction for the purposes of disease prevention. It provides the reader with a summary of the opportunities and challenges for implementation and identifies current gaps in supporting evidence. The document also lays out a potential roadmap by which the scientific and clinical community can navigate any future transition of PRS into routine clinical care. Finally, clinical scenarios are presented where information from PRS may hold most value and discuss organizational frameworks to enable responsible use of PRS testing while more evidence is being generated by clinical studies.

Breast MRI to Screen Women With Extremely Dense Breasts

Women with extremely dense breasts are at a higher risk of breast cancer, and the sensitivity of mammography in this group is reduced due to the masking effect of overlapping tissue. This review examines supplemental screening methods to improve detection in this population, with a focus on MRI. Morphologic techniques offer limited benefits, digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) shows inconsistent results, and ultrasound (US), while improving cancer detection rates (CDR), results in a higher rate of false positives. Functional imaging techniques show better performance, molecular breast imaging increases CDR but is limited in availability, and contrast-enhanced mammography is promising, with good results and as an accessible technique, but requires further validation. MRI, with sensitivity ranging from 81% to 100%, is the most supported modality. Despite strong evidence for MRI in this population, high costs, use of contrast, and longer scan times hinder widespread use. Abbreviated MRI protocols aim to overcome these barriers by reducing costs and scan duration. As personalized screening becomes a future focus, MRI remains the most effective option for women with extremely dense breasts. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 5.

A roadmap to reduce the incidence and mortality of breast cancer by rethinking our approach to women's health

Despite progress, breast cancer remains the most feared disease among women. In the USA alone, the incidence is now almost 300,000 new cancers per year, a rate that has nearly doubled in the last 30 years. Most women survive, but over 40,000 women a year still die of their disease [99]. It is the most diagnosed cancer among women and the second leading cause of cancer death. Important disparities exist in breast cancer outcomes among African American women, where women die of breast cancer at higher rates, are diagnosed younger, and at a more advanced stage. We are proposing a radical shift in our thinking about breast cancer prevention with an aspiration to dramatically lower breast cancer incidence. Most breast cancers are driven by steroid hormones. Throughout the life course, women are offered an array of hormonal treatments for menstrual cycle control, family planning, in vitro fertilization, postpartum weaning, and menopausal symptom management. There are mixed data on the extent to which each of these may contribute to increased or decreased risk for breast cancer. These endocrine manipulations could represent a great opportunity to potentially reduce breast cancer incidence and improve quality of life for survivors. To date, they have not been designed to explicitly reduce breast cancer risk. A new holistic approach will require scientists, drug developers, breast oncologists, obstetricians, gynecologists, endocrinologists, radiologists, and family medicine/internists to work together toward the common goal of reducing breast cancer risk while addressing other critical issues in women's health.

Surveillance Breast MRI in Women with a History of Breast Cancer: Association with Occurrence of Advanced Second Breast Cancer

Background Studies on the association between surveillance breast MRI in women with a personal history of breast cancer (PHBC) and advanced second breast cancer are lacking. Purpose To investigate the association between postoperative surveillance breast MRI and advanced second breast cancer in women with a PHBC by using propensity score matching (PSM). Materials and Methods Women who underwent breast cancer surgery between January 2009 and December 2014 were retrospectively identified at a single tertiary center. Second breast cancer was defined as ipsilateral or contralateral breast cancer diagnosed at least 1 year after surgery, and advanced second breast cancer was defined as second breast cancer (a) grade T2 or higher or lymph node-positive or (b) T1c triple-negative or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive. Women who underwent surveillance MRI and those who did not were matched using propensity scores according to 13 clinical-pathologic characteristics. Outcomes were compared using logistic regression analysis. Results Among the 3688 women (mean age, 51.1 years ± 10.5 [SD]), 2130 underwent surveillance MRI (MRI group) and 1558 did not (non-MRI group); 1062 patient pairs were matched. Advanced second breast cancer proportions for non-MRI and MRI groups were 1.7% (27 of 1558 participants) and 0.4% (eight of 2130 participants) before PSM and 1.6% (17 of 1062 participants) and 0.7% (seven of 1062) after PSM. Surveillance MRI was associated with lower odds of advanced second breast cancer before PSM (odds ratio [OR], 0.21 [95% CI: 0.10, 0.47]; P < .001) and after PSM (OR, 0.41 [95% CI: 0.17, 0.99]; P = .048). The proportion of symptomatic second breast cancers was higher in the non-MRI group before PSM (25% [16 of 65 second cancers] vs 6.4% [three of 47]; P = .01) and after PSM (21% [10 of 48] vs 3.2% [one of 31]; P = .003). Conclusion In women with a PHBC, MRI surveillance was associated with lower odds of advanced second breast cancer before and after PSM. © RSNA, 2025 Supplemental material is available for this article.

Ethical Dimensions of Population-Based Lung Cancer Screening in Canada: Key Informant Qualitative Description Study

Normative issues associated with the design and implementation of population-based lung cancer screening policies are underexamined. This study was an exposition of the ethical justification for screening and potential ethical issues and their solutions in Canadian jurisdictions. A qualitative description study was conducted. Key informants, defined as policymakers, scientists and clinicians who develop and implement lung cancer screening policies in Canada, were purposively sampled and interviewed using a semi-structured guide informed by population-based disease screening principles and ethical issues in cancer screening. Interview data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Fifteen key informants from seven provinces were interviewed. Virtually all justified screening by beneficence, describing that population benefits outweigh individual harms if high-risk people are screened in organized programs according to disease screening principles. Equity of screening access, stigma and lung cancer primary prevention were other ethical issues identified. Key informants prioritized beneficence over concerns for group-level justice issues when making decisions about whether to implement screening policies. This prioritization, though slight, may impede the implementation of screening policies in a way that effectively addresses justice issues, a goal likely to require justice theory and critical interpretation of disease screening principles.

ESR Essentials: screening for breast cancer - general recommendations by EUSOBI

Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in women accounting for about 30% of all new cancer cases and the incidence is constantly increasing. Implementation of mammographic screening has contributed to a reduction in breast cancer mortality of at least 20% over the last 30 years. Screening programs usually include all women irrespective of their risk of developing breast cancer and with age being the only determining factor. This approach has some recognized limitations, including underdiagnosis, false positive cases, and overdiagnosis. Indeed, breast cancer remains a major cause of cancer-related deaths in women undergoing cancer screening. Supplemental imaging modalities, including digital breast tomosynthesis, ultrasound, breast MRI, and, more recently, contrast-enhanced mammography, are available and have already shown potential to further increase the diagnostic performances. Use of breast MRI is recommended in high-risk women and women with extremely dense breasts. Artificial intelligence has also shown promising results to support risk categorization and interval cancer reduction. The implementation of a risk-stratified approach instead of a "one-size-fits-all" approach may help to improve the benefit-to-harm ratio as well as the cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening. KEY POINTS: Regular mammography should still be considered the mainstay of the breast cancer screening. High-risk women and women with extremely dense breast tissue should use MRI for supplemental screening or US if MRI is not available. Women need to participate actively in the decision to undergo personalized screening. KEY RECOMMENDATIONS: Mammography is an effective imaging tool to diagnose breast cancer in an early stage and to reduce breast cancer mortality (evidence level I). Until more evidence is available to move to a personalized approach, regular mammography should be considered the mainstay of the breast cancer screening. High-risk women should start screening earlier; first with yearly breast MRI which can be supplemented by yearly or biennial mammography starting at 35-40 years old (evidence level I). Breast MRI screening should be also offered to women with extremely dense breasts (evidence level I). If MRI is not available, ultrasound can be performed as an alternative, although the added value of supplemental ultrasound regarding cancer detection remains limited. Individual screening recommendations should be made through a shared decision-making process between women and physicians.

Receiving a Pathogenic Variant in a Population Breast Cancer Screening Trial: A Mixed Method Study

INTRODUCTION

Risk-based breast cancer screening aims to address persistent high morbidity and mortality. This study examined the experience of participants in the Women Informed to Screen Depending on Measures of Risk (WISDOM) trial who received a pathogenic variant in one of nine high or moderate penetrance breast cancer genes.

METHODS

Participants completed a brief survey (n = 181) immediately following the results disclosure and 1 year later. Descriptive statistics were computed and comparisons between participants at different risk levels were performed using Fisher's exact and McNemar's tests. Analysis of qualitative interviews (n = 42) at 2-4 weeks and 6 months post-results disclosure compared responses at the 2 time points and explained and elaborated on the survey data.

RESULTS

66.3% of survey respondents felt very or moderately prepared to receive genomic results. At the T1 survey, 80.7% of participants had shared the genetic result with a blood relative, increasing to 88.4% at T2; providing information and encouraging cascade testing were the most common reasons for sharing. Communication with a blood relative, other healthcare providers beyond the primary care provider, and cascade testing were higher for participants with a high risk than low or moderate risk genomic finding. Qualitative interviews elucidated varied reasons why participants felt (un)prepared for the results, including whether or not they had a family history of breast cancer, and illustrated the complexity of decision-making about sharing results.

CONCLUSIONS

Although most participants communicated results with family members and healthcare providers in accordance with their risk level, questions remain about how to adequately prepare individuals to receive pathogenic results, ensure timely and accessible follow-up care, and facilitate genetic counseling and cascade testing of at-risk relatives in the setting of population risk-based screening.

Evaluating Real World Health System Resource Utilization and Costs for a Risk-Based Breast Cancer Screening Approach in the Canadian PERSPECTIVE Integration and Implementation Project

BACKGROUND

A prospective cohort study was undertaken within the PERSPECTIVE I&I project to evaluate healthcare resource utilization and costs associated with breast cancer risk assessment and screening and overall costs stratified by risk level, in Ontario, Canada.

METHODS

From July 2019 to December 2022, 1997 females aged 50 to 70 years consented to risk assessment and received their breast cancer risk level and personalized screening action plan in Ontario. The mean costs for risk-stratified screening-related activities included risk assessment, screening and diagnostic costs. The GETCOST macro from the Institute of Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES) assessed the mean overall healthcare system costs.

RESULTS

For the 1997 participants, 83.3%, 14.4% and 2.3% were estimated to be average, higher than average, and high risk, respectively (median age (IQR): 60 [56-64] years). Stratification into the three risk levels was determined using the validated multifactorial CanRisk prediction tool that includes family history information, a polygenic risk score (PRS), breast density and established lifestyle/hormonal risk factors. The mean number of genetic counseling visits, mammograms and MRIs per individual increased with risk level. High-risk participants incurred the highest overall mean risk-stratified screening-related costs in 2022 CAD (±SD) at CAD 905 (±269) followed by CAD 580 (±192) and CAD 521 (±163) for higher-than-average and average-risk participants, respectively. Among the breast screening-related costs, the greatest cost burden across all risk groups was the risk assessment cost, followed by total diagnostic and screening costs. The mean overall healthcare cost per participant (±SD) was the highest for the average risk participants with CAD 6311 (±19,641), followed by higher than average risk with CAD 5391 (±8325) and high risk with CAD 5169 (±7676).

CONCLUSION

Although high-risk participants incurred the highest risk-stratified screening-related costs, their costs for overall healthcare utilization costs were similar to other risk levels. Our study underscored the importance of integrating risk stratification as part of the screening pathway to support breast cancer detection at an earlier and more treatable stage, thereby reducing costs and the overall burden on the healthcare system.

Acceptability of de-intensified screening for women at low risk of breast cancer: a randomised online experimental survey

BACKGROUND

Risk-stratified approaches to breast screening show promise for increasing benefits and reducing harms. But the successful implementation of such an approach will rely on public acceptability. To date, research suggests that while increased screening for women at high risk will be acceptable, any de-intensification of screening for low-risk groups may be met with less enthusiasm. We report findings from a population-based survey of women in England, approaching the age of eligibility for breast screening, to compare the acceptability of current age-based screening with two hypothetical risk-adapted approaches for women at low risk of breast cancer.

METHODS

An online survey of 1,579 women aged 40-49 with no personal experience of breast cancer or mammography. Participants were recruited via a market research panel, using target quotas for educational attainment and ethnic group, and were randomised to view information about (1) standard NHS age-based screening; (2) a later screening start age for low-risk women; or (3) a longer screening interval for low-risk women. Primary outcomes were cognitive, emotional, and global acceptability. ANOVAs and multiple regression were used to compare acceptability between groups and explore demographic and psychosocial factors associated with acceptability.

RESULTS

All three screening approaches were judged to be acceptable on the single-item measure of global acceptability (mean score > 3 on a 5-point scale). Scores for all three measures of acceptability were significantly lower for the risk-adapted scenarios than for age-based screening. There were no differences between the two risk-adapted scenarios. In multivariable analysis, higher breast cancer knowledge was positively associated with cognitive and emotional acceptability of screening approach. Willingness to undergo personal risk assessment was not associated with experimental group.

CONCLUSION

We found no difference in the acceptability of later start age vs. longer screening intervals for women at low risk of breast cancer in a large sample of women who were screening naïve. Although acceptability of both risk-adapted scenarios was lower than for standard age-based screening, overall acceptability was reasonable. The positive associations between knowledge and both cognitive and emotional acceptability suggests clear and reassuring communication about the rationale for de-intensified screening may enhance acceptability.

Women's experiences of risk-stratified breast cancer screening in the MyPeBS trial: a qualitative comparative study across two European countries

OBJECTIVE

Risk-stratification should improve the benefits-to-harms ratio for breast screening, whereby higher-risk women receive additional screening and low-risk women are screened less. This study investigated the effects of healthcare context by comparing how women in England and France experienced risk-based breast screening.

METHODS AND MEASURES

Fifty-two women were purposively sampled from participants who underwent risk-based screening in the MyPeBS trial. Women received objectively-derived 5-year breast cancer risk estimates (low = < 1%, average = 1-1.66%, high = ≥ 1.67 to <6%, very-high-risk = ≥ 6%). This determined future trial-related screening schedules and prevention options. Semi-structured interviews were transcribed for thematic framework analysis.

RESULTS

Two overarching themes were produced: the importance of supported risk communication and accessibility of risk management. Overall, risk-based breast screening was viewed positively. However, trial procedures, especially in risk estimate provision, differed across sites. Women at increased risk were more reassured when appointments were with specialist healthcare professionals (HCP). When absent, this resulted in reduced satisfaction with risk communication and greater uncertainty about its personal relevance. Low-risk women's views on extended mammogram schedules seemed linked to how health services are organised differently.

CONCLUSIONS

Context is an important consideration regarding acceptability of healthcare innovations such as risk-stratified screening: it should not be assumed that findings from one country apply universally.

Breast Cancer Screening in the Intermediate-Risk Population: Falling Through the Cracks?

Breast cancer screening guidelines vary for women at intermediate risk (15%-20% lifetime risk) for developing breast cancer across jurisdictions. Currently available risk assessment models have differing strengths and weaknesses, creating difficulty and ambiguity in selecting the most appropriate model to utilize. Clarifying which model to utilize in individual circumstances may help determine the best screening guidelines to use for each individual.

Organizational impact of systemic implementation of digital breast tomosynthesis as a primary test for breast cancer screening in Italy

PURPOSE

We present a comprehensive investigation into the organizational, social, and ethical impact of implementing digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) as a primary test for breast cancer screening in Italy. The analyses aimed to assess the feasibility of DBT specifically for all women aged 45-74, women aged 45-49 only, or those with dense breasts only.

METHODS

Questions were framed according to the European Network of Health Technology Assessment (EuNetHTA) Screening Core Model to produce evidence for the resources, equity, acceptability, and feasibility domains of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) decision framework. The study integrated evidence from the literature, the MAITA DBT trials, and Italian pilot programs. Structured interviews, surveys, and systematic reviews were conducted to gather data on organizational impact, acceptability among women, reading and acquisition times, and the technical requirements of DBT in screening.

RESULTS

Implementing DBT could significantly affect the screening program, primarily due to increased reading times and the need for additional human resources (radiologists and radiographers). Participation rates in DBT screening were similar, if not better, to those observed with standard digital mammography, indicating good acceptability among women. The study also highlighted the necessity for specific training for radiographers. The interviewed key persons unanimously considered feasible tailored screening strategies based on breast density or age, but they require effective communication with the target population.

CONCLUSIONS

An increase in radiologists' and radiographers' workload limits the feasibility of DBT screening. Tailored screening strategies may maximize the benefits of DBT while mitigating potential challenges.

High-value breast cancer care within resource limitations

Breast cancer care is a costly global health issue where effective management depends on early detection and treatment. A breast cancer diagnosis can result in financial catastrophe especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Large inequities in breast cancer care are observed and represent a global challenge to caregivers and patients. Strategies to improve early diagnosis include awareness and clinical breast examination in LMIC, and screening in high-income countries (HIC). The use of clinical guidelines for the management of breast cancer is needed. Adapted guidelines from HIC can address disparities in populations with limited resources. Locally developed strategies still provide effective guidance in improving survival. Integrated practice units (IPU) with timely multidisciplinary breast care conferences and patient navigators are required to achieve high-value, personalized breast cancer management in HIC as well as LMIC. Breast cancer patient care should include a quality of life evaluation using ideally patient-reported outcomes (PROM) and experience measurements (PREM). Evaluation of breast cancer outcomes must include the financial cost of delivered care. The resulting value perspective should guide resource allocation and program priorities. The value of care must be improved by translating the findings of social and economic research into practice and resolving systemic inequity in clinical breast cancer research. Cancer survivorship programs must be put in place everywhere. The treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer must require more attention in the future, especially in LMIC.

A structured process for the validation of a decision-analytic model: application to a cost-effectiveness model for risk-stratified national breast screening

BACKGROUND

Decision-makers require knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of decision-analytic models used to evaluate healthcare interventions to be able to confidently use the results of such models to inform policy. A number of aspects of model validity have previously been described, but no systematic approach to assessing the validity of a model has been proposed. This study aimed to consolidate the different aspects of model validity into a step-by-step approach to assessing the strengths and weaknesses of a decision-analytic model.

METHODS

A pre-defined set of steps were used to conduct the validation process of an exemplar early decision-analytic-model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of a risk-stratified national breast cancer screening programme [UK healthcare perspective; lifetime horizon; costs (£; 2021)]. Internal validation was assessed in terms of descriptive validity, technical validity and face validity. External validation was assessed in terms of operational validation, convergent validity (or corroboration) and predictive validity.

RESULTS

The results outline the findings of each step of internal and external validation of the early decision-analytic-model and present the validated model (called 'MANC-RISK-SCREEN'). The positive aspects in terms of meeting internal validation requirements are shown together with the remaining limitations of MANC-RISK-SCREEN.

CONCLUSION

Following a transparent and structured validation process, MANC-RISK-SCREEN has been shown to have satisfactory internal and external validity for use in informing resource allocation decision-making. We suggest that MANC-RISK-SCREEN can be used to assess the cost-effectiveness of exemplars of risk-stratified national breast cancer screening programmes (NBSP) from the UK perspective.

IMPLICATIONS

A step-by-step process for conducting the validation of a decision-analytic model was developed for future use by health economists. Using this approach may help researchers to fully demonstrate the strengths and limitations of their model to decision-makers.

Screening for Breast Cancer: Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

Importance

Breast cancer is a leading cause of cancer mortality for US women. Trials have established that screening mammography can reduce mortality risk, but optimal screening ages, intervals, and modalities for population screening guidelines remain unclear.

Objective

To review studies comparing different breast cancer screening strategies for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Data Sources

MEDLINE, Cochrane Library through August 22, 2022; literature surveillance through March 2024.

Study Selection

English-language publications; randomized clinical trials and nonrandomized studies comparing screening strategies; expanded criteria for screening harms.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Two reviewers independently assessed study eligibility and quality; data extracted from fair- and good-quality studies.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Mortality, morbidity, progression to advanced cancer, interval cancers, screening harms.

Results

Seven randomized clinical trials and 13 nonrandomized studies were included; 2 nonrandomized studies reported mortality outcomes. A nonrandomized trial emulation study estimated no mortality difference for screening beyond age 74 years (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.83 to 1.19]). Advanced cancer detection did not differ following annual or biennial screening intervals in a nonrandomized study. Three trials compared digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) mammography screening with digital mammography alone. With DBT, more invasive cancers were detected at the first screening round than with digital mammography, but there were no statistically significant differences in interval cancers (pooled relative risk, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.64-1.17]; 3 studies [n = 130 196]; I2 = 0%). Risk of advanced cancer (stage II or higher) at the subsequent screening round was not statistically significant for DBT vs digital mammography in the individual trials. Limited evidence from trials and nonrandomized studies suggested lower recall rates with DBT. An RCT randomizing individuals with dense breasts to invitations for supplemental screening with magnetic resonance imaging reported reduced interval cancer risk (relative risk, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.29-0.77]) and additional false-positive recalls and biopsy results with the intervention; no longer-term advanced breast cancer incidence or morbidity and mortality outcomes were available. One RCT and 1 nonrandomized study of supplemental ultrasound screening reported additional false-positives and no differences in interval cancers.

Conclusions and Relevance

Evidence comparing the effectiveness of different breast cancer screening strategies is inconclusive because key studies have not yet been completed and few studies have reported the stage shift or mortality outcomes necessary to assess relative benefits.

Implementing Multifactorial Risk Assessment with Polygenic Risk Scores for Personalized Breast Cancer Screening in the Population Setting: Challenges and Opportunities

Risk-stratified breast screening has been proposed as a strategy to overcome the limitations of age-based screening. A prospective cohort study was undertaken within the PERSPECTIVE I&I project, which will generate the first Canadian evidence on multifactorial breast cancer risk assessment in the population setting to inform the implementation of risk-stratified screening. Recruited females aged 40-69 unaffected by breast cancer, with a previous mammogram, underwent multifactorial breast cancer risk assessment. The adoption of multifactorial risk assessment, the effectiveness of methods for collecting risk factor information and the costs of risk assessment were examined. Associations between participant characteristics and study sites, as well as data collection methods, were assessed using logistic regression; all p-values are two-sided. Of the 4246 participants recruited, 88.4% completed a risk assessment, with 79.8%, 15.7% and 4.4% estimated at average, higher than average and high risk, respectively. The total per-participant cost for risk assessment was CAD 315. Participants who chose to provide risk factor information on paper/telephone (27.2%) vs. online were more likely to be older (p = 0.021), not born in Canada (p = 0.043), visible minorities (p = 0.01) and have a lower attained education (p < 0.0001) and perceived fair/poor health (p < 0.001). The 34.4% of participants requiring risk factor verification for missing/unusual values were more likely to be visible minorities (p = 0.009) and have a lower attained education (p ≤ 0.006). This study demonstrates the feasibility of risk assessment for risk-stratified screening at the population level. Implementation should incorporate an equity lens to ensure cancer-screening disparities are not widened.

Lessons learned from COVID-19: improving breast cancer care post-pandemic from the patient perspective

BACKGROUND

Since the onset of the pandemic, breast cancer (BC) services have been disrupted in most countries. The purpose of this qualitative study is to explore the unmet needs, patient-priorities, and recommendations for improving BC healthcare post-pandemic for women with BC and to understand how they may vary based on social determinants of health (SDH), in particular socio-economic status (SES).

METHODS

Thirty-seven women, who were purposively sampled based on SDH and previously interviewed about the impact of COVID-19 on BC, were invited to take part in follow-up semi-structured qualitative interviews in early 2023. The interviews explored their perspectives of BC care since the easing of COVID-19 government restrictions, including unmet needs, patient-priorities, and recommendations specific to BC care. Thematic analysis was conducted to synthesize each topic narratively with corresponding sub-themes. Additionally, variation by SDH was analyzed within each sub-theme.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight women (mean age = 61.7 years, standard deviation (SD) = 12.3) participated in interviews (response rate = 76%). Thirty-nine percent (n = 11) of women were categorized as high-SES, while 61% (n = 17) of women were categorized as low-SES. Women expressed unmet needs in their BC care including routine care and mental and physical well-being care, as well as a lack of financial support to access BC care. Patient priorities included the following: developing cohesion between different aspects of BC care; communication with and between healthcare professionals; and patient empowerment within BC care. Recommendations moving forward post-pandemic included improving the transition from active to post-treatment, enhancing support resources, and implementing telemedicine where appropriate. Overall, women of low-SES experienced more severe unmet needs, which in turn resulted in varied patient priorities and recommendations.

CONCLUSION

As health systems are recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic, the emphasis should be on restoring access to BC care and improving the quality of BC care, with a particular consideration given to those women from low-SES, to reduce health inequalities post-pandemic.

The risk-based breast screening (RIBBS) study protocol: a personalized screening model for young women

The optimal mammography screening strategy for women aged 45-49 years is a matter of debate. We present the RIBBS study protocol, a quasi-experimental, prospective, population-based study comparing a risk- and breast density-stratified screening model (interventional cohort) with annual digital mammography (DM) screening (observational control cohort) in a real-world setting. The interventional cohort consists of 10,269 women aged 45 years enrolled between 2020 and 2021 from two provinces of the Veneto Region (northen Italy). At baseline, participants underwent two-view digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and completed the Tyrer-Cuzick risk prediction model. Volumetric breast density (VBD) was calculated from DBT and the lifetime risk (LTR) was estimated by including VBD among the risk factors. Based on VBD and LTR, women were classified into five subgroups with specific screening protocols for subsequent screening rounds: (1) LTR ≤ 17% and nondense breast: biennial DBT; (2) LTR ≤ 17% and dense breast: biennial DBT and ultrasound; (3) LTR 17-30% or LTR > 30% without family history of BC, and nondense breast: annual DBT; (4) LTR 17-30% or > 30% without family history of BC, and dense breast: annual DBT and ultrasound; and (5) LTR > 30% and family history of BC: annual DBT and breast MRI. The interventional cohort is still ongoing. An observational, nonequivalent control cohort of 43,000 women aged 45 years participating in an annual DM screening programme was recruited in three provinces of the neighbouring Emilia-Romagna Region. Cumulative incidence rates of advanced BC at three, five, and ten years between the two cohorts will be compared, adjusting for the incidence difference at baseline.Trial registration This study is registered on Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05675085).

Comprehensive Inherited Risk Estimation for Risk-Based Breast Cancer Screening in Women

PURPOSE

Family history (FH) and pathogenic variants (PVs) are used for guiding risk surveillance in selected high-risk women but little is known about their impact for breast cancer screening on population level. In addition, polygenic risk scores (PRSs) have been shown to efficiently stratify breast cancer risk through combining information about common genetic factors into one measure.

METHODS

In longitudinal real-life data, we evaluate PRS, FH, and PVs for stratified screening. Using FinnGen (N = 117,252), linked to the Mass Screening Registry for breast cancer (1992-2019; nationwide organized biennial screening for age 50-69 years), we assessed the screening performance of a breast cancer PRS and compared its performance with FH of breast cancer and PVs in moderate- (CHEK2)- to high-risk (PALB2) susceptibility genes.

RESULTS

Effect sizes for FH, PVs, and high PRS (>90th percentile) were comparable in screening-aged women, with similar implications for shifting age at screening onset. A high PRS identified women more likely to be diagnosed with breast cancer after a positive screening finding (positive predictive value [PPV], 39.5% [95% CI, 37.6 to 41.5]). Combinations of risk factors increased the PPVs up to 45% to 50%. A high PRS conferred an elevated risk of interval breast cancer (hazard ratio [HR], 2.78 [95% CI, 2.00 to 3.86] at age 50 years; HR, 2.48 [95% CI, 1.67 to 3.70] at age 60 years), and women with a low PRS (<10th percentile) had a low risk for both interval- and screen-detected breast cancers.

CONCLUSION

Using real-life screening data, this study demonstrates the effectiveness of a breast cancer PRS for risk stratification, alone and combined with FH and PVs. Further research is required to evaluate their impact in a prospective risk-stratified screening program, including cost-effectiveness.

Implementation considerations for risk-tailored cancer screening in the population: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Risk-tailored screening has emerged as a promising approach to optimise the balance of benefits and harms of existing population cancer screening programs. It tailors screening (e.g., eligibility, frequency, interval, test type) to individual risk rather than the current one-size-fits-all approach of most organised population screening programs. However, the implementation of risk-tailored cancer screening in the population is challenging as it requires a change of practice at multiple levels i.e., individual, provider, health system levels. This scoping review aims to synthesise current implementation considerations for risk-tailored cancer screening in the population, identifying barriers, facilitators, and associated implementation outcomes.

METHODS

Relevant studies were identified via database searches up to February 2023. Results were synthesised using Tierney et al. (2020) guidance for evidence synthesis of implementation outcomes and a multilevel framework.

RESULTS

Of 4138 titles identified, 74 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies in this review focused on the implementation outcomes of acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness, reflecting the pre-implementation stage of most research to date. Only six studies included an implementation framework. The review identified consistent evidence that risk-tailored screening is largely acceptable across population groups, however reluctance to accept a reduction in screening frequency for low-risk informed by cultural norms, presents a major barrier. Limited studies were identified for cancer types other than breast cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation strategies will need to address alternate models of delivery, education of health professionals, communication with the public, screening options for people at low risk of cancer, and inequity in outcomes across cancer types.

Attitudes towards risk-stratified breast cancer screening: a population-based survey among 5,001 Danish women

BACKGROUND

The individual woman's risk of being diagnosed with breast cancer can now be estimated more precisely, and screening can be stratified accordingly. The risk assessment requires that women are willing to provide a blood test, additional personal information, to know their risk, and alter screening intervals. This study aimed to investigate Danish women's attitudes towards risk-stratified breast cancer screening.

METHODS

An online, cross-sectional survey was conducted among Danish women aged 52-67 years. We used logistic regression analyses to assess how personal characteristics were associated with the women's attitudes.

RESULTS

5,001 women completed the survey (response rate 44%) of which 74% approved of risk estimation to potentially alter their screening intervals. However, only 42% would accept an extended screening interval if found to have low breast cancer risk, while 89% would accept a reduced interval if at high risk. The main determinants of these attitudes were age, education, screening participation, history of breast cancer, perceived breast cancer risk and to some extent breast cancer worry.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that women are positive towards risk-stratified breast cancer screening. However, reservations and knowledge among subgroups of women must be carefully considered and addressed before wider implementation of risk-stratified breast cancer screening in a national program.

Acceptability of risk-tailored cancer screening among Australian GPs: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Cancer screening that is tailored to individual risk has the potential to improve health outcomes and reduce screening-related harms, if implemented well. However, successful implementation depends on acceptability, particularly as this approach will require GPs to change their practice.

AIM

To explore Australian GPs' views about the acceptability of risk-tailored screening across cancer types and to identify barriers to and facilitators of implementation.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with Australian GPs.

METHOD

Interviews were carried out with GPs and audio-recorded and transcribed. Data were first analysed inductively then deductively using an implementation framework.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 20) found risk-tailored screening to be acceptable in principle, recognising potential benefits in offering enhanced screening to those at highest risk. However, they had significant concerns that changes in screening advice could potentially cause confusion. They also reported that a reduced screening frequency or exclusion from a screening programme for those deemed low risk may not initially be acceptable, especially for common cancers with minimally invasive screening. Other reservations about implementing risk-tailored screening in general practice included a lack of high-quality evidence of benefit, fear of missing the signs or symptoms of a patient's cancer, and inadequate time with patients. While no single preferred approach to professional education was identified, education around communicating screening results and risk stratification was considered important.

CONCLUSION

GPs may not currently be convinced of the net benefits of risk-tailored screening. Development of accessible evidence-based guidelines, professional education, risk calculators, and targeted public messages will increase its feasibility in general practice.

Recent advances in polygenic scores: translation, equitability, methods and FAIR tools

Polygenic scores (PGS) can be used for risk stratification by quantifying individuals' genetic predisposition to disease, and many potentially clinically useful applications have been proposed. Here, we review the latest potential benefits of PGS in the clinic and challenges to implementation. PGS could augment risk stratification through combined use with traditional risk factors (demographics, disease-specific risk factors, family history, etc.), to support diagnostic pathways, to predict groups with therapeutic benefits, and to increase the efficiency of clinical trials. However, there exist challenges to maximizing the clinical utility of PGS, including FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) use and standardized sharing of the genomic data needed to develop and recalculate PGS, the equitable performance of PGS across populations and ancestries, the generation of robust and reproducible PGS calculations, and the responsible communication and interpretation of results. We outline how these challenges may be overcome analytically and with more diverse data as well as highlight sustained community efforts to achieve equitable, impactful, and responsible use of PGS in healthcare.

Exploring Biomarkers in Breast Cancer: Hallmarks of Diagnosis, Treatment, and Follow-Up in Clinical Practice

Breast cancer is a prevalent malignancy in the present day, particularly affecting women as one of the most common forms of cancer. A significant portion of patients initially present with localized disease, for which curative treatments are pursued. Conversely, another substantial segment is diagnosed with metastatic disease, which has a worse prognosis. Recent years have witnessed a profound transformation in the prognosis for this latter group, primarily due to the discovery of various biomarkers and the emergence of targeted therapies. These biomarkers, encompassing serological, histological, and genetic indicators, have demonstrated their value across multiple aspects of breast cancer management. They play crucial roles in initial diagnosis, aiding in the detection of relapses during follow-up, guiding the application of targeted treatments, and offering valuable insights for prognostic stratification, especially for highly aggressive tumor types. Molecular markers have now become the keystone of metastatic breast cancer diagnosis, given the diverse array of chemotherapy options and treatment modalities available. These markers signify a transformative shift in the arsenal of therapeutic options against breast cancer. Their diagnostic precision enables the categorization of tumors with elevated risks of recurrence, increased aggressiveness, and heightened mortality. Furthermore, the existence of therapies tailored to target specific molecular anomalies triggers a cascade of changes in tumor behavior. Therefore, the primary objective of this article is to offer a comprehensive review of the clinical, diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic utility of the principal biomarkers currently in use, as well as of their clinical impact on metastatic breast cancer. In doing so, our goal is to contribute to a more profound comprehension of this complex disease and, ultimately, to enhance patient outcomes through more precise and effective treatment strategies.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography and a polygenic risk score

INTRODUCTION

Several studies have proved that Polygenic Risk Score (PRS) is a potential candidate for realizing precision screening. The effectiveness of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening for lung cancer has been proved to reduce lung cancer specific and overall mortality, but the cost-effectiveness of diverse screening strategies remained unclear.

METHODS

The comparative cost-effectiveness analysis used a Markov state-transition model to assess the potential effect and costs of the screening strategies incorporating PRS or not. A hypothetical cohort of 300,000 heavy smokers entered the study at age 50-74 years and were followed up until death or age 79 years. The model was run with a cycle length of 1 year. All the transition probabilities were validated and the performance value of PRS was extracted from published literature. A societal perspective was adopted and cost parameters were derived from databases of local medical insurance bureau. Sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

The strategy incorporating PRS was estimated to obtain an ICER of CNY 156,691.93 to CNY 221,741.84 per QALY gained compared with non-screening with the initial start age range across 50-74 years. The strategy that screened using LDCT alone from 70-74 years annually could obtain an ICER of CNY 80,880.85 per QALY gained, which was the most cost-effective strategy. The introduction of PRS as an extra eligible criteria was associated with making strategies cost-saving but also lose the capability of gaining more LYs compared with LDCT screening alone.

CONCLUSION

The PRS-based conjunctive screening strategy for lung cancer screening in China was not cost-effective using the willingness-to-pay threshold of 1 time Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita, and the optimal screening strategy for lung cancer still remains to be LDCT screening for now. Further optimization of the screening modality can be useful to consider adoption of PRS and prospective evaluation remains a research priority.

A scoping review of programme specific mammographic breast density related guidelines and practices within breast screening programmes

Introduction

High mammographic breast density (MBD) is an independent breast cancer risk factor. In organised breast screening settings, discussions are ongoing regarding the optimal clinical role of MBD to help guide screening decisions. The aim of this scoping review was to provide an overview of current practices incorporating MBD within population-based breast screening programmes and from professional organisations internationally.

Methods

This scoping review was conducted in accordance with the framework proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. The electronic databases, MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, Scopus, and Web of Science were systematically searched. Grey literature sources, websites of international breast screening programmes, and relevant government organisations were searched to identify further relevant literature. Data from identified materials were extracted and presented as a narrative summary.

Results

The search identified 78 relevant documents. Documents were identified for breast screening programmes in 18 countries relating to screening intervals for women with dense breasts, MBD measurement, reporting, notification, and guiding supplemental screening. Documents were identified from 18 international professional organisations with the majority of material relating to supplemental screening guidance for women with dense breasts. Key factors collated during the data extraction process as relevant considerations for MBD practices included the evidence base needed to inform decision-making processes and resources (healthcare system costs, radiology equipment, and workforce planning).

Conclusions

This scoping review summarises current practices and guidelines incorporating MBD in international population-based breast screening settings and highlights the absence of consensus between organised breast screening programmes incorporating MBD in current breast screening protocols.

The role of polygenic risk scores in breast cancer risk perception and decision-making

Polygenic risk scores (PRS) have the potential to improve the accuracy of clinical risk assessments, yet questions about their clinical validity and readiness for clinical implementation persist. Understanding how individuals integrate and act on the information provided by PRS is critical for their effective integration into routine clinical care, yet few studies have examined how individuals respond to the receipt of polygenic risk information. We conducted an embedded Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI) study to examine if and how unaffected participants in a US population breast cancer screening trial understood and utilized PRS, as part of a multifactorial risk score combining traditional risk factors with a genetic risk assessment, to make screening and risk-reduction decisions. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 24 trial participants who were designated at elevated risk for breast cancer due to their combined risk score. Interviews were analyzed using a grounded theory approach. Participants understood PRS conceptually and accepted it as one of many risk factors to consider, yet the value and meaning they ascribed to this risk estimate varied. Most participants reported financial and insurance barriers to enhanced screening with MRI and were not interested in taking risk-reducing medications. These findings contribute to our understanding of how PRS may be best translated from research to clinical care. Furthermore, they illuminate ethical concerns about identifying risk and making recommendations based on polygenic risk in a population screening context where many may have trouble accessing appropriate care.

Personalized Breast Cancer Screening: A Risk Prediction Model Based on Women Attending BreastScreen Norway

BACKGROUND

We aimed to develop and validate a model predicting breast cancer risk for women targeted by breast cancer screening.

METHOD

This retrospective cohort study included 57,411 women screened at least once in BreastScreen Norway during the period from 2007 to 2019. The prediction model included information about age, mammographic density, family history of breast cancer, body mass index, age at menarche, alcohol consumption, exercise, pregnancy, hormone replacement therapy, and benign breast disease. We calculated a 4-year absolute breast cancer risk estimates for women and in risk groups by quartiles. The Bootstrap resampling method was used for internal validation of the model (E/O ratio). The area under the curve (AUC) was estimated with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

The 4-year predicted risk of breast cancer ranged from 0.22-7.33%, while 95% of the population had a risk of 0.55-2.31%. The thresholds for the quartiles of the risk groups, with 25% of the population in each group, were 0.82%, 1.10%, and 1.47%. Overall, the model slightly overestimated the risk with an E/O ratio of 1.10 (95% CI: 1.09-1.11) and the AUC was 62.6% (95% CI: 60.5-65.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

This 4-year risk prediction model showed differences in the risk of breast cancer, supporting personalized screening for breast cancer in women aged 50-69 years.

Breast cancer risk assessment and risk distribution in 3,491 Slovenian women invited for screening at the age of 50; a population-based cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

The evidence shows that risk-based strategy could be implemented to avoid unnecessary harm in mammography screening for breast cancer (BC) using age-only criterium. Our study aimed at identifying the uptake of Slovenian women to the BC risk assessment invitation and assessing the number of screening mammographies in case of risk-based screening.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional population-based study enrolled 11,898 women at the age of 50, invited to BC screening. The data on BC risk factors, including breast density from the first 3,491 study responders was collected and BC risk was assessed using the Tyrer-Cuzick algorithm (version 8) to classify women into risk groups (low, population, moderately increased, and high risk group). The number of screening mammographies according to risk stratification was simulated.

RESULTS

57% (6,785) of women returned BC risk questionnaires. When stratifying 3,491 women into risk groups, 34.0% were assessed with low, 62.2% with population, 3.4% with moderately increased, and 0.4% with high 10-year BC risk. In the case of potential personalised screening, the number of screening mammographies would drop by 38.6% compared to the current screening policy.

CONCLUSIONS

The study uptake showed the feasibility of risk assessment when inviting women to regular BC screening. 3.8% of Slovenian women were recognised with higher than population 10-year BC risk. According to Slovenian BC guidelines they may be screened more often. Overall, personalised screening would decrease the number of screening mammographies in Slovenia. This information is to be considered when planning the pilot and assessing the feasibility of implementing population risk-based screening.

What do women think about having received their breast cancer risk as part of a risk-stratified NHS Breast Screening Programme? A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Risk-stratified screening is being considered for national breast screening programmes. It is unclear how women experience risk-stratified screening and receipt of breast cancer risk information in real time. This study aimed to explore the psychological impact of undergoing risk-stratified screening within England's NHS Breast Screening Programme.

METHODS

Individual telephone interviews were conducted with 40 women who participated in the BC-Predict study and received a letter indicating their estimated breast cancer risk as one of four risk categories: low (<2% 10-year risk), average (2-4.99%), above average (moderate; 5-7.99%) or high (≥8%). Audio-recorded interview transcriptions were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Two themes were produced: 'From risk expectations to what's my future health story?' highlights that women overall valued the opportunity to receive risk estimates; however, when these were discordant with perceived risk, this causes temporary distress or rejection of the information. 'Being a good (woman) citizen' where women felt positive contributing to society but may feel judged if they then cannot exert agency over the management of their risk or access follow-up support CONCLUSIONS: Risk-stratified breast screening was generally accepted without causing long-lasting distress; however, issues related to risk communication and access to care pathways need to be considered for implementation.

Canadian Healthcare Professionals' Views and Attitudes toward Risk-Stratified Breast Cancer Screening

Given the controversy over the effectiveness of age-based breast cancer (BC) screening, offering risk-stratified screening to women may be a way to improve patient outcomes with detection of earlier-stage disease. While this approach seems promising, its integration requires the buy-in of many stakeholders. In this cross-sectional study, we surveyed Canadian healthcare professionals about their views and attitudes toward a risk-stratified BC screening approach. An anonymous online questionnaire was disseminated through Canadian healthcare professional associations between November 2020 and May 2021. Information collected included attitudes toward BC screening recommendations based on individual risk, comfort and perceived readiness related to the possible implementation of this approach. Close to 90% of the 593 respondents agreed with increased frequency and earlier initiation of BC screening for women at high risk. However, only 9% agreed with the idea of not offering BC screening to women at very low risk. Respondents indicated that primary care physicians and nurse practitioners should play a leading role in the risk-stratified BC screening approach. This survey identifies health services and policy enhancements that would be needed to support future implementation of a risk-stratified BC screening approach in healthcare systems in Canada and other countries.

Development and testing of a polygenic risk score for breast cancer aggressiveness

Aggressive breast cancers portend a poor prognosis, but current polygenic risk scores (PRSs) for breast cancer do not reliably predict aggressive cancers. Aggressiveness can be effectively recapitulated using tumor gene expression profiling. Thus, we sought to develop a PRS for the risk of recurrence score weighted on proliferation (ROR-P), an established prognostic signature. Using 2363 breast cancers with tumor gene expression data and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotypes, we examined the associations between ROR-P and known breast cancer susceptibility SNPs using linear regression models. We constructed PRSs based on varying p-value thresholds and selected the optimal PRS based on model r2 in 5-fold cross-validation. We then used Cox proportional hazards regression to test the ROR-P PRS's association with breast cancer-specific survival in two independent cohorts totaling 10,196 breast cancers and 785 events. In meta-analysis of these cohorts, higher ROR-P PRS was associated with worse survival, HR per SD = 1.13 (95% CI 1.06-1.21, p = 4.0 × 10-4). The ROR-P PRS had a similar magnitude of effect on survival as a comparator PRS for estrogen receptor (ER)-negative versus positive cancer risk (PRSER-/ER+). Furthermore, its effect was minimally attenuated when adjusted for PRSER-/ER+, suggesting that the ROR-P PRS provides additional prognostic information beyond ER status. In summary, we used integrated analysis of germline SNP and tumor gene expression data to construct a PRS associated with aggressive tumor biology and worse survival. These findings could potentially enhance risk stratification for breast cancer screening and prevention.

Machine Learning Algorithms to Predict Breast Cancer Recurrence Using Structured and Unstructured Sources from Electronic Health Records

Recurrence is a critical aspect of breast cancer (BC) that is inexorably tied to mortality. Reuse of healthcare data through Machine Learning (ML) algorithms offers great opportunities to improve the stratification of patients at risk of cancer recurrence. We hypothesized that combining features from structured and unstructured sources would provide better prediction results for 5-year cancer recurrence than either source alone. We collected and preprocessed clinical data from a cohort of BC patients, resulting in 823 valid subjects for analysis. We derived three sets of features: structured information, features from free text, and a combination of both. We evaluated the performance of five ML algorithms to predict 5-year cancer recurrence and selected the best-performing to test our hypothesis. The XGB (eXtreme Gradient Boosting) model yielded the best performance among the five evaluated algorithms, with precision = 0.900, recall = 0.907, F1-score = 0.897, and area under the receiver operating characteristic AUROC = 0.807. The best prediction results were achieved with the structured dataset, followed by the unstructured dataset, while the combined dataset achieved the poorest performance. ML algorithms for BC recurrence prediction are valuable tools to improve patient risk stratification, help with post-cancer monitoring, and plan more effective follow-up. Structured data provides the best results when fed to ML algorithms. However, an approach based on natural language processing offers comparable results while potentially requiring less mapping effort.

Quantifying the effects of risk-stratified breast cancer screening when delivered in real time as routine practice versus usual screening: the BC-Predict non-randomised controlled study (NCT04359420)

BACKGROUND

Risk stratification as a routine part of the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) could provide a better balance of benefits and harms. We developed BC-Predict, to offer women when invited to the NHSBSP, which collects standard risk factor information; mammographic density; and in a sub-sample, a Polygenic Risk Score (PRS).

METHODS

Risk prediction was estimated primarily from self-reported questionnaires and mammographic density using the Tyrer-Cuzick risk model. Women eligible for NHSBSP were recruited. BC-Predict produced risk feedback letters, inviting women at high risk (≥8% 10-year) or moderate risk (≥5-<8% 10-year) to have appointments to discuss prevention and additional screening.

RESULTS

Overall uptake of BC-Predict in screening attendees was 16.9% with 2472 consenting to the study; 76.8% of those received risk feedback within the 8-week timeframe. Recruitment was 63.2% with an onsite recruiter and paper questionnaire compared to <10% with BC-Predict only (P < 0.0001). Risk appointment attendance was highest for those at high risk (40.6%); 77.5% of those opted for preventive medication.

DISCUSSION

We have shown that a real-time offer of breast cancer risk information (including both mammographic density and PRS) is feasible and can be delivered in reasonable time, although uptake requires personal contact. Preventive medication uptake in women newly identified at high risk is high and could improve the cost-effectiveness of risk stratification.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Retrospectively registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04359420).

Psychological impact of risk-stratified screening as part of the NHS Breast Screening Programme: multi-site non-randomised comparison of BC-Predict versus usual screening (NCT04359420)

BACKGROUND

Adding risk stratification to standard screening via the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) allows women at higher risk to be offered additional prevention and screening options. It may, however, introduce new harms such as increasing cancer worry. The present study aimed to assess whether there were differences in self-reported harms and benefits between women offered risk stratification (BC-Predict) compared to women offered standard NHSBSP, controlling for baseline values.

METHODS

As part of the larger PROCAS2 study (NCT04359420), 5901 women were offered standard NHSBSP or BC-Predict at the invitation to NHSBSP. Women who took up BC-Predict received 10-year risk estimates: "high" (≥8%), "above average (moderate)" (5-7.99%), "average" (2-4.99%) or "below average (low)" (<2%) risk. A subset of 662 women completed questionnaires at baseline and at 3 months (n = 511) and 6 months (n = 473).

RESULTS

State anxiety and cancer worry scores were low with no differences between women offered BC-Predict or NHSBSP. Women offered BC-Predict and informed of being at higher risk reported higher risk perceptions and cancer worry than other women, but without reaching clinical levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Concerns that risk-stratified screening will produce harm due to increases in general anxiety or cancer worry are unfounded, even for women informed that they are at high risk.

15 years of GWAS discovery: Realizing the promise

It has been 15 years since the advent of the genome-wide association study (GWAS) era. Here, we review how this experimental design has realized its promise by facilitating an impressive range of discoveries with remarkable impact on multiple fields, including population genetics, complex trait genetics, epidemiology, social science, and medicine. We predict that the emergence of large-scale biobanks will continue to expand to more diverse populations and capture more of the allele frequency spectrum through whole-genome sequencing, which will further improve our ability to investigate the causes and consequences of human genetic variation for complex traits and diseases.

Estimating the Cost of 3 Risk Prediction Strategies for Potential Use in the United Kingdom National Breast Screening Program

Background

Economic evaluations have suggested that risk-stratified breast cancer screening may be cost-effective but have used assumptions to estimate the cost of risk prediction. The aim of this study was to identify and quantify the resource use and associated costs required to introduce a breast cancer risk-stratification approach into the English national breast screening program.

Methods

A micro-costing study, conducted alongside a cohort-based prospective trial (BC-PREDICT), identified the resource use and cost per individual (£; 2021 price year) of providing a risk-stratification strategy at a woman's first mammography. Costs were calculated for 3 risk-stratification approaches: Tyrer-Cuzick survey, Tyrer-Cuzick with Volpara breast-density measurement, and Tyrer-Cuzick with Volpara breast-density measurement and testing for 142 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP). Costs were determined for the intervention as implemented in the trial and in the health service.

Results

The cost of providing the risk-stratification strategy was calculated to be £16.45 for the Tyrer-Cuzick survey approach, £21.82 for the Tyrer-Cuzick with Volpara breast-density measurement, and £102.22 for the Tyrer-Cuzick with Volpara breast-density measurement and SNP testing.

Limitations

This study did not use formal expert elicitation methods to synthesize estimates.

Conclusion

The costs of risk prediction using a survey and breast density measurement were low, but adding SNP testing substantially increases costs. Implementation issues present in the trial may also significantly increase the cost of risk prediction.

Implications

This is the first study to robustly estimate the cost of risk-stratification for breast cancer screening. The cost of risk prediction using questionnaires and automated breast density measurement was low, but full economic evaluations including accurate costs are required to provide evidence of the cost-effectiveness of risk-stratified breast cancer screening.

Highlights

Economic evaluations have suggested that risk-stratified breast cancer screening may be a cost-effective use of resources in the United Kingdom.Current estimates of the cost of risk stratification are based on pragmatic assumptions.This study provides estimates of the cost of risk stratification using 3 strategies and when these strategies are implemented perfectly and imperfectly in the health system.The cost of risk stratification is relatively low unless single nucleotide polymorphisms are included in the strategy.

Healthcare professionals' views following implementation of risk stratification into a national breast cancer screening programme

Background

It is crucial to determine feasibility of risk-stratified screening to facilitate successful implementation. We introduced risk-stratification (BC-Predict) into the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) at three screening sites in north-west England from 2019 to 2021. The present study investigated the views of healthcare professionals (HCPs) on acceptability, barriers, and facilitators of the BC-Predict intervention and on the wider implementation of risk-based screening after BC-Predict was implemented in their screening site.

Methods

Fourteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with HCPs working across the breast screening pathway at three NHSBSP sites that implemented BC-Predict. Thematic analysis interpreted the data.

Results

Three pre-decided themes were produced. (1) Acceptability of risk-based screening: risk-stratification was perceived as a beneficial step for both services and women. HCPs across the pathway reported low burden of running the BC-Predict trial on routine tasks, but with some residual concerns; (2) Barriers to implementation: comprised capacity constraints of services including the inadequacy of current IT systems to manage women with different risk profiles and, (3) Facilitators to implementation: included the continuation of stakeholder consultation across the pathway to inform implementation and need for dedicated risk screening admin staff, a push for mammography staff recruitment and guidance for screening services. Telephone helplines, integrating primary care, and supporting access for all language needs was emphasised.

Conclusion

Risk-stratified breast screening was viewed as a progressive step providing it does not worsen inequalities for women. Implementation of risk-stratified breast screening requires staff to be reassured that there will be systems in place to support implementation and that it will not further burden their workload. Next steps require a comprehensive assessment of the resource needed for risk-stratification versus current resource availability, upgrades to screening IT and building screening infrastructure. The role of primary care needs to be determined. Simplification and clarification of risk-based screening pathways is needed to support HCPs agency and facilitate implementation. Forthcoming evidence from ongoing randomised controlled trials assessing effectiveness of breast cancer risk-stratification will also determine implementation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-10134-0.