The goal of this project is to determine the benefit of incorporating novel imaging markers of breast tissue composition in guiding decisions for personalized breast cancer screening recommendations. Specifically, we propose to determine the predictive value of a new Breast Complexity Index (BCI), defined as a comprehensive descriptor of breast density and parenchymal texture, in;) improving breast cancer risk estimation and //) assessing the risk of a false-positive or a false-negative screening exam. Studies have identified breast density as a strong independent risk factor for breast cancer. In addition, clinical trials have shown that mammographic sensitivity and specificity drops significantly in women with dense breasts, when compared to women with fatty breasts, suggesting that increased breast density is also independently associated with cancers missed by mammography (i.e., false negatives) and an increase in false positive recalls. The proposed research plan is designed as a phased imaging biomarker validation study with the Intention to determine the predictive value of BCI in improving individualized assessment in two important aspects of personalized risk: a woman's risk of developing breast cancer and her risk of having unnecessary call-back or mammographically occult disease. Our main hypothesis is that, by integrating quantitative breast density information with parenchymal texture features, BCI can provide a more comprehensive and objective descriptor of breast tissue composition than the commonly used BIRADS density and breast percent density (PD%) estimates and therefore result in more accurate predictions at the individual level. Improving risk assessment in both of these aspects can result in more informed decisions for guiding breast cancer screening recommendations, recognizing that personalized approaches to screening not only intensify surveillance to those most likely to benefit {i.e., high-risk women), but should also reduce intensity or provide alternative approaches to those less likely to benefit. Within this setting we propose compare mammography to breast tomosynthesis, an emerging tomographic breast imaging modality with the potential to significantly reduce false-positive call-backs in the screening setting, especially for women with very complex breast tissue. Our study holds the promise to shift the current paradigm in breast health care delivery by providing improved clinical decision-making tools for guiding personalized breast cancer screening recommendations.

Agency
National Institute of Health (NIH)
Institute
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Type
Specialized Center--Cooperative Agreements (U54)
Project #
5U54CA163313-04
Application #
8715727
Study Section
Special Emphasis Panel (ZCA1-SRLB-R)
Project Start
Project End
Budget Start
2014-06-01
Budget End
2015-05-31
Support Year
4
Fiscal Year
2014
Total Cost
$222,588
Indirect Cost
$99,328
Name
University of Pennsylvania
Department
Type
DUNS #
042250712
City
Philadelphia
State
PA
Country
United States
Zip Code
19104
Zuckerman, Samantha P; Conant, Emily F; Keller, Brad M et al. (2016) Implementation of Synthesized Two-dimensional Mammography in a Population-based Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Program. Radiology 281:730-736
Conant, Emily F; Beaber, Elisabeth F; Sprague, Brian L et al. (2016) Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography compared to digital mammography alone: a cohort study within the PROSPR consortium. Breast Cancer Res Treat 156:109-16
Weiss, Julie E; Goodrich, Martha; Harris, Kimberly A et al. (2016) Challenges With Identifying Indication for Examination in Breast Imaging as a Key Clinical Attribute in Practice, Research, and Policy. J Am Coll Radiol :
Kim, Jane J; Tosteson, Anna Na; Zauber, Ann G et al. (2016) Cancer Models and Real-world Data: Better Together. J Natl Cancer Inst 108:
Korhonen, Katrina E; Weinstein, Susan P; McDonald, Elizabeth S et al. (2016) Strategies to Increase Cancer Detection: Review of True-Positive and False-Negative Results at Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Screening. Radiographics 36:1954-1965
Tosteson, Anna N A; Beaber, Elisabeth F; Tiro, Jasmin et al. (2016) Variation in Screening Abnormality Rates and Follow-Up of Breast, Cervical and Colorectal Cancer Screening within the PROSPR Consortium. J Gen Intern Med 31:372-9
Haas, Jennifer S; Sprague, Brian L; Klabunde, Carrie N et al. (2016) Provider Attitudes and Screening Practices Following Changes in Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening Guidelines. J Gen Intern Med 31:52-9
Chen, Jane S; Sprague, Brian L; Klabunde, Carrie N et al. (2016) Take the money and run? Redemption of a gift card incentive in a clinician survey. BMC Med Res Methodol 16:25
Armstrong, Katrina; Kim, Jane J; Halm, Ethan A et al. (2016) Using lessons from breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening to inform the development of lung cancer screening programs. Cancer 122:1338-42
McCarthy, Anne Marie; Keller, Brad M; Pantalone, Lauren M et al. (2016) Racial Differences in Quantitative Measures of Area and Volumetric Breast Density. J Natl Cancer Inst 108:

Showing the most recent 10 out of 39 publications