| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Johnson, Kristin, et al.
(author)
-
False-positive recalls in the prospective Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial
- 2023
-
In: European Radiology. - 0938-7994. ; 33:11, s. 8089-8099
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives: To evaluate the total number of false-positive recalls, including radiographic appearances and false-positive biopsies, in the Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial (MBTST). Methods: The prospective, population-based MBTST, with 14,848 participating women, was designed to compare one-view digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) to two-view digital mammography (DM) in breast cancer screening. False-positive recall rates, radiographic appearances, and biopsy rates were analyzed. Comparisons were made between DBT, DM, and DBT + DM, both in total and in trial year 1 compared to trial years 2 to 5, with numbers, percentages, and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: The false-positive recall rate was higher with DBT, 1.6% (95% CI 1.4; 1.8), compared to screening with DM, 0.8% (95% CI 0.7; 1.0). The proportion of the radiographic appearance of stellate distortion was 37.3% (91/244) with DBT, compared to 24.0% (29/121) with DM. The false-positive recall rate with DBT during trial year 1 was 2.6% (95% CI 1.8; 3.5), then stabilized at 1.5% (95% CI 1.3; 1.8) during trial years 2 to 5. The percentage of stellate distortion with DBT was 50% (19/38) trial year 1 compared to 35.0% (72/206) trial years 2 to 5. Conclusions: The higher false-positive recall rate with DBT compared to DM was mainly due to an increased detection of stellate findings. The proportion of these findings, as well as the DBT false-positive recall rate, was reduced after the first trial year. Clinical relevance statement: Assessment of false-positive recalls gives information on potential benefits and side effects in DBT screening. Key Points: • The false-positive recall rate in a prospective digital breast tomosynthesis screening trial was higher compared to digital mammography, but still low compared to other trials. • The higher false-positive recall rate with digital breast tomosynthesis was mainly due to an increased detection of stellate findings; the proportion of these findings was reduced after the first trial year.
|
|
| 3. |
- Olinder, Jon, et al.
(author)
-
Hepcidin discriminates sepsis from other critical illness at admission to intensive care
- 2022
-
In: Scientific Reports. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2045-2322. ; 12, s. 1-16
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Initial differential diagnosis and prognosis for patients admitted to intensive care with suspected sepsis remain arduous. Hepcidin has emerged as a potential biomarker for sepsis. Here we report data on the relevance of levels of hepcidin versus other biomarkers as a diagnostic and prognostic tool for sepsis. 164 adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) within 24 h upon arrival to the hospital were included. Blood samples collected daily for seven consecutive days and hepcidin levels, heparin binding protein (HBP) levels and standard biomarkers were determined. Blood cultures were initiated at inclusion. Clinical scores were evaluated daily and mortality after 28- and 180-days was recorded. One hundred of the patients were found to fulfil the criteria for sepsis whereas 64 did not. Hepcidin levels at admission were significantly higher in the septic than in the non-septic patients. In septic patients hepcidin levels declined significantly already at 24 h followed by a steady decline. A significant negative correlation was observed between hepcidin levels and SAPS 3 in patients with sepsis. Hepcidin levels at inclusion were significantly higher among septic patients that survived 180-days and predicted mortality. Our data show that hepcidin levels are indicative of sepsis in patients admitted to the ICU and has a prognostic value for mortality.
|
|
| 4. |
- Olinder, Jakob, et al.
(author)
-
Impact of breast density on diagnostic accuracy in digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography : results from a European screening trial
- 2023
-
In: Breast Cancer Research. - 1465-5411. ; 25:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: The diagnostic accuracy of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and digital mammography (DM) in breast cancer screening may vary per breast density subgroup. The purpose of this study was to evaluate which women, based on automatically assessed breast density subgroups, have the greatest benefit of DBT compared with DM in the prospective Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial. Materials and methods: The prospective European, Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial (n = 14,848, Jan. 27, 2010–Feb. 13, 2015) compared one-view DBT and two-view DM, with consensus meeting before recall. Breast density was assessed in this secondary analysis with the automatic software Laboratory for Individualized Breast Radiodensity Assessment. DBT and DM’s diagnostic accuracies were compared by breast density quintiles of breast percent density (PD) and absolute dense area (DA) with confidence intervals (CI) and McNemar’s test. The association between breast density and cancer detection was analyzed with logistic regression, adjusted for ages < 55 and ≥ 55 years and previous screening participation. Results: In total, 14,730 women (median age: 58 years; inter-quartile range = 16) were included in the analysis. Sensitivity was higher and specificity lower for DBT compared with DM for all density subgroups. The highest breast PD quintile showed the largest difference in sensitivity and specificity at 81.1% (95% CI 65.8–90.5) versus 43.2% (95% CI 28.7–59.1), p <.001 and 95.5% (95% CI 94.7–96.2) versus 97.2% (95% CI 96.6–97.8), p < 0.001, respectively. Breast PD quintile was also positively associated with cancer detected via DBT at odds ratio 1.24 (95% CI 1.09–1.42, p = 0.001). Conclusion: Women with the highest breast density had the greatest benefit from digital breast tomosynthesis compared with digital mammography with increased sensitivity at the cost of slightly lower specificity. These results may influence digital breast tomosynthesis’s use in an individualized screening program stratified by, for instance, breast density. Trial registration. Trial registration at https://www.ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT01091545, registered March 24, 2010.
|
|
