| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Mavaddat, Nasim, et al.
(författare)
-
Prediction of Breast Cancer Risk Based on Profiling With Common Genetic Variants
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1460-2105 .- 0027-8874. ; 107:5, s. 036-036
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Data for multiple common susceptibility alleles for breast cancer may be combined to identify women at different levels of breast cancer risk. Such stratification could guide preventive and screening strategies. However, empirical evidence for genetic risk stratification is lacking. Methods: We investigated the value of using 77 breast cancer-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for risk stratification, in a study of 33 673 breast cancer cases and 33 381 control women of European origin. We tested all possible pair-wise multiplicative interactions and constructed a 77-SNP polygenic risk score (PRS) for breast cancer overall and by estrogen receptor (ER) status. Absolute risks of breast cancer by PRS were derived from relative risk estimates and UK incidence and mortality rates. Results: There was no strong evidence for departure from a multiplicative model for any SNP pair. Women in the highest 1% of the PRS had a three-fold increased risk of developing breast cancer compared with women in the middle quintile (odds ratio [OR] = 3.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.95 to 3.83). The ORs for ER-positive and ER-negative disease were 3.73 (95% CI = 3.24 to 4.30) and 2.80 (95% CI = 2.26 to 3.46), respectively. Lifetime risk of breast cancer for women in the lowest and highest quintiles of the PRS were 5.2% and 16.6% for a woman without family history, and 8.6% and 24.4% for a woman with a first-degree family history of breast cancer. Conclusions: The PRS stratifies breast cancer risk in women both with and without a family history of breast cancer. The observed level of risk discrimination could inform targeted screening and prevention strategies. Further discrimination may be achievable through combining the PRS with lifestyle/environmental factors, although these were not considered in this report.
|
|
| 5. |
- Bakic, Predrag R., et al.
(författare)
-
Evaluation of a flat fielding method for simultaneous DBT and MI acquisition
- 2020
-
Ingår i: 15th International Workshop on Breast Imaging, IWBI 2020. - : SPIE. - 1996-756X .- 0277-786X. - 9781510638310 ; 11513
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- We are developing a prototype system for simultaneous digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and mechanical imaging (MI). MI maps the local pressure distribution during clinical exams, to distinguish breast abnormalities from the normal tissue. Both DBT alone, and MI when combined with digital mammography, have demonstrated the ability to reduce false positives; however, the benefit of combining DBT with MI has not been investigated. A practical limitation in simultaneous DBT and MI is the presence of the MI sensor in DBT images. Metallic elements of the sensor generate noticeable artifacts, which may interfere with clinical analysis. Previously, we shown that the sensor artifacts can be reduced by flat fielding, which combines projections of the sensor acquired with and without the breast. In this paper we evaluate the flat fielding by assessing artifact reduction and visibility of breast abnormalities. Images of a physical anthropomorphic breast phantom were acquired using a clinical wide-angle DBT system. Visual evaluation was performed by experienced medical physicists. Image quality descriptors were calculated in images with and without flat fielding. To evaluate the visibility of abnormalities we estimated the full width at half maximum (FWHM) for calcifications modeled in the phantom. Our preliminary results suggest a substantial reduction of artifacts by flat fielding (on average 83%). Few noticeable artifacts remain near the breast edge, in the reconstructed image with the sensor in focus. We observed a 17% reduction in the FWHM. Future work would include a detailed assessment, and method optimization using virtual trials as a design aid.
|
|
