Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 104
Filter
1.
BMC Cancer ; 22(1): 141, 2022 Feb 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2162322

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As the combination of systemic and targeted chemotherapies is associated with severe adverse side effects and long-term health complications, there is interest in reducing treatment intensity for patients with early-stage breast cancer (EBC). Clinical trials are needed to determine the feasibility of reducing treatment intensity while maintaining 3-year recurrence-free survival of greater than 92%. To recruit participants for these trials, it is important to understand patient perspectives on reducing chemotherapy. METHODS: We collected qualitative interview data from twenty-four patients with Stage II-III breast cancer and sixteen patient advocates. Interviews explored potential barriers and facilitators to participation in trials testing reduced amounts of chemotherapy. As the COVID-19 pandemic struck during data collection, seventeen participants were asked about the potential impact of COVID-19 on their interest in these trials. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed, and researchers used qualitative content analysis to code for dominant themes. RESULTS: Seventeen participants (42.5%) expressed interest in participating in a trial of reduced chemotherapy. Barriers to reducing chemotherapy included (1) fear of recurrence and inefficacy, (2) preference for aggressive treatment, (3) disinterest in clinical trials, (4) lack of information about expected outcomes, (5) fear of regret, and (6) having young children. Facilitators included (1) avoiding physical toxicity, (2) understanding the scientific rationale of reducing chemotherapy, (3) confidence in providers, (4) consistent monitoring and the option to increase dosage, (5) fewer financial and logistical challenges, and (6) contributing to scientific knowledge. Of those asked, nearly all participants said they would be more motivated to reduce treatment intensity in the context of COVID-19, primarily to avoid exposure to the virus while receiving treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Among individuals with EBC, there is significant interest in alleviating treatment-related toxicity by reducing chemotherapeutic intensity. Patients will be more apt to participate in trials testing reduced amounts of chemotherapy if these are framed in terms of customizing treatment to the individual patient and added benefit-reduced toxicities, higher quality of life during treatment and lower risk of long-term complications-rather than in terms of taking treatments away or doing less than the standard of care. Doctor-patient rapport and provider support will be crucial in this process.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Breast Neoplasms/psychology , Patient Advocacy/psychology , Adult , Aged , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Decision Making , Fear/psychology , Female , Humans , Interviews as Topic , Middle Aged , Motivation , Qualitative Research , Quality of Life
2.
Eur J Cancer ; 177: 72-79, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2117958

ABSTRACT

AIMS: We analysed the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (COVID-19) on the quality of breast cancer care in certified EUSOMA (European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists) breast centres. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The results of the EUSOMA quality indicators were compared, based on pseudonymised individual records, for the periods 1 March 2020 till 30 June 2020 (first COVID-19 peak in most countries in Europe) and 1 March 2019 till 30 June 2019. In addition, a questionnaire was sent to the participating Centres for investigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the organisation and the quality of breast cancer care. RESULTS: Forty-five centres provided data and 31 (67%) responded to the questionnaire. The total number of new cases dropped by 19% and there was a small significant higher tumour (p = 0.003) and lymph node (p = 0.011) stage at presentation. Comparing quality indicators (12,736 patients) by multivariable analysis showed mostly non-significant differences. Surgery could be performed in a COVID-free zone in 94% of the centres, COVID testing was performed before surgery in 96% of the centres, and surgical case load was reduced in 55% of the centres. Modifications of the indications for neoadjuvant endocrine therapy, chemotherapy, and targeted therapy were necessary in 23%, 23%, and 10% of the centres; changes in indications for adjuvant endocrine, chemo-, targeted, immune, and radiotherapy in 3%, 19%, 3%, 6%, and 10%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Quality of breast cancer care was well maintained in EUSOMA breast centres during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. A small but significantly higher tumour and lymph node stage at presentation was observed.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Humans , Female , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/therapy , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , COVID-19 Testing
3.
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet ; 44(9): 871-877, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2087367

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic profile of breast cancer cases during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic compared with the previous year. METHODS: It is a retrospective study of cases diagnosed by a reference service in the public health system of Campinas, SP, Brazil. Two periods were analyzed: March to October 2019 (preCOVID period) and March to October 2020 (COVID-period). All women diagnosed during the periods were included. The Chi-Squared or Fisher exact and Mann-Whitney tests were used. RESULTS: In the preCOVID and COVID periods, breast cancers were diagnosed, respectively, in 115 vs 59 women, and the mean ages at diagnosis were 55 and 57 years (p = 0.339). In the COVID period, the family history of breast cancer was more observed (9.6% vs 29.8%, p < 0.001), cases were more frequently symptomatic (50.4% vs 79.7%, p < 0.001) and had more frequently palpable masses (56.5% vs 79.7%, p = 0.003). In symptomatic women, the mean number of days from symptom to mammography were 233.6 (458.3) in 2019 and 152.1 (151.5) in 2020 (p = 0.871). Among invasive tumors, the proportion of breast cancers in stages I and II was slightly higher in the COVID period, although not significantly (76.7% vs 82.4%, p = 0.428). Also in the COVID period, the frequency of luminal A-like tumors was lower (29.2% vs 11.8%, p = 0.018), of triple-negative tumors was twice as high (10.1% vs 21.6%, p = 0.062), and of estrogen receptor-positive tumors was lower (82.2% vs 66.0%, p = 0.030). CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, breast cancer diagnoses were reduced. Cases detected were suggestive of a worse prognosis: symptomatic women with palpable masses and more aggressive subtypes. Indolent tumors were those more sensitive to the interruption in screening.


OBJETIVO: Este estudo teve como objetivo avaliar o perfil diagnóstico dos casos de câncer de mama na pandemia de coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) em comparação com o ano anterior. MéTODOS: Este é um estudo retrospectivo de casos diagnosticados em um serviço de referência da rede pública de saúde de Campinas, SP, Brasil. Foram analisados dois períodos: de março a outubro de 2019 (período pré-COVID) e de março a outubro de 2020 (período COVID). Todas as mulheres diagnosticadas durante os períodos foram incluídas. Foram utilizados os testes do qui-quadrado ou exato de Fisher e Mann-Whitney. RESULTADOS: Nos períodos pré-COVID e COVID, o câncer de mama foi diagnosticado, respectivamente, em 115 e 59 mulheres, e a média de idade no diagnóstico foi de 55 e 57 anos (p = 0,339). No período COVID, foram mais frequentes a história familiar de câncer de mama (9,6% vs 29,8%, p < 0,001), casos sintomáticos (50,4% vs 79,7%, p < 0,001) e com massas palpáveis (56,5% vs 79,7%, p = 0,003). Nas mulheres sintomáticas, a média de dias desde os sintomas até a mamografia foi de 233,6 (458,3) no pré-COVID e 152,1 (151,5) no COVID (p = 0,871). Entre os tumores invasivos no período COVID, a proporção de cânceres nos estágios I e II foi ligeiramente maior, porém não significativa (76,7% vs 82,4%, p = 0,428). Ainda no período COVID, a frequência de tumores tipo luminal A-like foi menor (29,2% vs 11,8%, p = 0,018), de tumores triplo-negativos foi duas vezes maior (10,1% vs 21,6%, p = 0,062), e de tumores positivos para receptor de estrogênio foi inferior (82,2% vs 66,0%, p = 0,030). CONCLUSãO: Durante a pandemia de COVID-19, houve uma redução no diagnóstico de câncer de mama. Os casos detectados eram sugestivos de pior prognóstico: mulheres sintomáticas com massas palpáveis e subtipos mais agressivos. Os tumores indolentes foram os mais sensíveis à interrupção do rastreamento.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Mammography , Pandemics , Receptors, Estrogen , Retrospective Studies
4.
Eur J Radiol ; 152: 110334, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2076083

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Axillary lymph node characteristics on axillary ultrasound (US), breast MRI and 18F-FDG PET/CT are relevant at breast cancer diagnosis. Axillary lymphadenopathy after COVID-19 vaccination has been frequently reported. This may cause a diagnostic dilemma, particularly in the ipsilateral axilla in women who have a either a recent diagnosis of breast cancer or a history of breast cancer. This review provides an overview of the current evidence regarding axillary lymph node characteristics at breast cancer diagnosis versus "post-COVID-19 vaccination". METHODS: A non-systematic narrative review was performed. Studies describing axillary lymph node characteristics per imaging modality (axillary US, breast MRI and 18F-FDG PET/CT) in breast cancer patients versus post-COVID-19 vaccination were selected and used for the current study. RESULTS: The morphologic characteristics and distribution of abnormal nodes on US may differ from the appearance of metastatic adenopathy since diffuse cortical thickening of the lymph nodes is the most observed characteristic after vaccination, whereas metastases show as most suspicious characteristics focal cortical thickening and effacement of the fatty hilum. Current evidence on MRI and 18F-FDG on morphologic characteristics of axillary lymphadenopathy is missing, although it was suggested that vaccine related lymphadenopathy is more likely to be present in level 2 and 3 nodes than metastatic nodes. Reported frequencies of lymphadenopathy post-COVID-19 vaccination range from 49% to 85% (US), 29% (breast MRI) and 14.5% to 53.9% (18F-FDG PET/CT). Several factors may impact the presence or extent of lymphadenopathy post-COVID-19 vaccination: injection site, type of vaccine (i.e., mRNA versus vector), time interval (days) between vaccination and imaging, previous history of COVID-19 pneumonia, and first versus second vaccine dose. CONCLUSION: Although lymph node characteristics differ at breast cancer diagnosis versus post-COVID-19 vaccination, clinical information regarding injection site, vaccine type and vaccination date needs to be documented to improve the interpretation and guide treatment towards the next steps of action.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Lymphadenopathy , Axilla/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Female , Fluorodeoxyglucose F18 , Humans , Lymph Nodes/diagnostic imaging , Lymph Nodes/pathology , Lymphadenopathy/diagnostic imaging , Lymphadenopathy/etiology , Lymphadenopathy/pathology , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography , Vaccination
5.
Br J Radiol ; 95(1133): 20211234, 2022 May 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2065080

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Modern radiotherapy (RT) techniques require careful delineation of the target. There is no particular RT contouring guideline for patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). In this study, we examined the distribution of pre-chemotherapy clinically positive nodal metastases. METHODS: We explored the coverage rate of the RTOG breast contouring guideline by deformable fusion of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) scan. We retrospectively evaluated neoadjuvant chemotherapy patients. All PET-CT images were imported into the planning software. We combined the planning CT and the CT images of PET-CT with rigid and then a deformable registration. We manually contoured positive lymph nodes on the CT component of the PET-CT data set and transferred them to planning CT after fusion. We evaluated whether previously contoured lymphatic CTVs, according to the RTOG breast atlas, include GTV-LNs. RESULTS: All breast cancer patients between October 2018 and February 2021 were evaluated from the electronic database. There were 142 radiologically defined positive lymph nodes in 31 patients who were irradiated after NACT. Most LNs (70%) were in the level I axilla. Only 71.1% (n:101) of the whole lymph nodes in 10 patients were totally covered, 22.5% (n:32) partially covered and 6.4% %(n:9) totally undercovered. CONCLUSIONS: The extent of regional nodal areas in the RTOG atlas may be insufficient to cover positive lymph nodes adequately. For patients with nodal involvement undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy, PET-CT image fusions can be helpful to be sure that positive lymph nodes are in the treatment volume. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: RTOG contouring atlas may be insufficient to cover all involved lymph nodes after NACT. For patients with nodal involvement undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy, PET-CT image fusions may help to be sure that positive lymph nodes are in the treatment volume.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Female , Fluorodeoxyglucose F18 , Humans , Lymph Nodes/diagnostic imaging , Lymph Nodes/pathology , Lymphatic Metastasis/diagnostic imaging , Lymphatic Metastasis/pathology , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography/methods , Positron-Emission Tomography , Radiopharmaceuticals , Retrospective Studies
6.
Breast Cancer Res Treat ; 196(3): 527-534, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2048350

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: When Core Needle Biopsy (CNB) demonstrates Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia (ADH), Flat Epithelial Atypia (FEA), Intraductal Papilloma (IDP), or Radial Scar/Complex Sclerosing Lesion (RS), excisional biopsy (EB) is often performed to rule out underlying malignancy with upstage rates (UR) ranging between 1 and 20%. The COVID-19 pandemic led to delayed EB for many patients. We sought to evaluate whether this delay was associated with higher UR. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of women who underwent CNB and then EB for ADH, FEA, IDP, or RS between 2017 and 2021 using an IRB-approved repository. UR was evaluated by days between CNB and EB. RESULTS: 473 patients met inclusion. 55 were upstaged to cancer (11.6%). 178 patients had pure ADH on CNB and 37 were upstaged (20.8%). 50 patients had pure FEA and 3 were upstaged (6%). 132 had pure IDP and 7 were upstaged (5.3%). 98 had pure RS and 1 was upstaged (1%). 7/15 (46.7%) had a combination of diagnoses or diagnosis with palpable mass and were upstaged. Days between CNB and EB were < 60 for 275 patients (58.1%), 60-90 for 108 (22.8%), 91-120 for 43 (9.1%), and > 120 for 47 (9.9%). There was no significant difference in UR (10.9% for < 60, 14.8% for 60-90, 7% for 90-120, and 12.8% for > 120, p = 0.54). UR for ADH was clinically increased after 60 days (27.8 vs. 17.5%), but this did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.1). CONCLUSION: Surgical delay was not associated with an increased UR.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Carcinoma in Situ , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating , Fibrocystic Breast Disease , Inosine Diphosphate , Papilloma, Intraductal , Humans , Female , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/diagnosis , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/surgery , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Papilloma, Intraductal/diagnosis , Papilloma, Intraductal/surgery , Papilloma, Intraductal/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Cicatrix/etiology , Cicatrix/pathology , Pandemics , Fibrocystic Breast Disease/pathology , Biopsy, Large-Core Needle , Carcinoma in Situ/pathology , Hyperplasia/pathology , Breast/pathology
7.
J Clin Oncol ; 40(25): 2946-2956, 2022 09 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2043160

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Combining standard of care (pertuzumab-trastuzumab [PH], chemotherapy) with cancer immunotherapy may potentiate antitumor immunity, cytotoxic activity, and patient outcomes in high-risk, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive early breast cancer. We report the phase III IMpassion050 primary analysis of neoadjuvant atezolizumab, PH, and chemotherapy in these patients. METHODS: Patients with a primary tumor of > 2 cm and histologically confirmed, positive lymph node status (T2-4, N1-3, M0) were randomly assigned 1:1 to atezolizumab/placebo with dose-dense doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide, followed by paclitaxel, and PH. After surgery, patients were to continue atezolizumab/placebo and PH (total: 1 year of HER2-targeted therapy); those with residual disease could switch to ado-trastuzumab emtansine with atezolizumab/placebo. Coprimary efficacy end points were pathologic complete response (pCR; ypT0/is ypN0) rates in intention-to-treat (ITT) and programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive populations. RESULTS: At clinical cutoff (February 5, 2021), pCR rates in the placebo and atezolizumab groups in the ITT populations were 62.7% (n = 143/228) and 62.4% (n = 141/226), respectively (difference -0.33%; 95% CI, -9.2 to 8.6; P = .9551). The pCR rates in the placebo and atezolizumab groups in patients with PD-L1-positive tumors were 72.5% (n = 79/109) and 64.2% (n = 70/109), respectively (difference -8.26%; 95% CI, -20.6 to 4.0; P = .1846). Grade 3-4 and serious adverse events were more frequent in the atezolizumab versus placebo group. Five grade 5 adverse events occurred (four neoadjuvant, one adjuvant; two assigned to study treatment), all with atezolizumab. Overall, the safety profile was consistent with that of atezolizumab in other combination studies. CONCLUSION: Atezolizumab with neoadjuvant dose-dense doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide-paclitaxel and PH for high-risk, HER2-positive early breast cancer did not increase pCR rates versus placebo in the ITT or PD-L1-positive populations. PH and chemotherapy remains standard of care; longer follow-up may help to inform the long-term impact of atezolizumab.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , B7-H1 Antigen/therapeutic use , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Cyclophosphamide , Doxorubicin , Female , Humans , Neoadjuvant Therapy/adverse effects , Paclitaxel , Receptor, ErbB-2/metabolism , Trastuzumab , Treatment Outcome
8.
Radiographics ; 42(7): 1897-1911, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2020456

ABSTRACT

Axillary lymphadenopathy caused by the high immunogenicity of messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccines presents radiologists with new diagnostic dilemmas in differentiating vaccine-related benign reactive lymphadenopathy from that due to malignant causes. Understanding axillary anatomy and lymphatic drainage is key to radiologic evaluation of the axilla. US plays a critical role in evaluation and classification of axillary lymph nodes on the basis of their cortical and hilar morphology, which allows prediction of metastatic disease. Guidelines for evaluation and management of axillary lymphadenopathy continue to evolve as radiologists gain more experience with axillary lymphadenopathy related to COVID-19 vaccines. General guidelines recommend documenting vaccination dates and laterality and administering all vaccine doses contralateral to the site of primary malignancy whenever applicable. Guidelines also recommend against postponing imaging for urgent clinical indications or for treatment planning in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. Although conservative management approaches to axillary lymphadenopathy initially recommended universal short-interval imaging follow-up, updates to those approaches as well as risk-stratified approaches recommend interpreting lymphadenopathy in the context of both vaccination timing and the patient's overall risk of metastatic disease. Patients with active breast cancer in the pretreatment or peritreatment phase should be evaluated with standard imaging protocols regardless of vaccination status. Tissue sampling and multidisciplinary discussion remain useful in management of complex cases, including increasing lymphadenopathy at follow-up imaging, MRI evaluation of extent of disease, response to neoadjuvant treatment, and potentially confounding cases. An invited commentary by Weinstein is available online. ©RSNA, 2022.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Lymphadenopathy , Humans , Female , Lymphatic Metastasis/pathology , COVID-19 Vaccines , Axilla/pathology , Lymph Nodes/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods , Radiologists
9.
Radiographics ; 42(7): 1912-1924, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2009233

ABSTRACT

Health disparities in Asian women are complex and multifactorial. Screening attendance is low among Asian women, regardless of nativity or acculturation, and breast cancer detection has decreased by more than half in this population during the COVID-19 pandemic. The follow-up rate after abnormal screening results is similarly poor among Asian women compared with that among other groups, often resulting in a delay of cancer diagnosis. Yet the incidence of breast cancer in Asian women is increasing in the United States, with no such increase observed in other racial and ethnic groups in recent years. The age distribution of breast cancer in Asian women is distinct and peaks in younger women, underscoring the importance of early screening. The predilection for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-enriched tumors may reflect the unique biologic characteristics of breast cancer among Asian subgroups, which are not well understood. Known biomarkers for breast cancer risk such as body mass index and mammographic density do not perform the same way in Asian women, as compared with other groups, owing to a lack of Asian population-specific data. Within that limitation, the association between body mass index and breast cancer is strongest in older Asian women, and the association between breast density and breast cancer is strongest in younger Asian women. There is an unmet need to improve breast cancer care in Asian women, a heterogeneous and growing population that is facing an increasing burden of breast cancer. An invited commentary by Leung is available online. ©RSNA, 2022.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Female , United States , Humans , Aged , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Pandemics , Breast/pathology , Breast Density
10.
Eur Radiol ; 32(9): 5921-5929, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1990616

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate if radiomics with machine learning can differentiate between F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-avid breast cancer metastatic lymphadenopathy and FDG-avid COVID-19 mRNA vaccine-related axillary lymphadenopathy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed FDG-positive, pathology-proven, metastatic axillary lymph nodes in 53 breast cancer patients who had PET/CT for follow-up or staging, and FDG-positive axillary lymph nodes in 46 patients who were vaccinated with the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine. Radiomics features (110 features classified into 7 groups) were extracted from all segmented lymph nodes. Analysis was performed on PET, CT, and combined PET/CT inputs. Lymph nodes were randomly assigned to a training (n = 132) and validation cohort (n = 33) by 5-fold cross-validation. K-nearest neighbors (KNN) and random forest (RF) machine learning models were used. Performance was evaluated using an area under the receiver-operator characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) score. RESULTS: Axillary lymph nodes from breast cancer patients (n = 85) and COVID-19-vaccinated individuals (n = 80) were analyzed. Analysis of first-order features showed statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) in all combined PET/CT features, most PET features, and half of the CT features. The KNN model showed the best performance score for combined PET/CT and PET input with 0.98 (± 0.03) and 0.88 (± 0.07) validation AUC, and 96% (± 4%) and 85% (± 9%) validation accuracy, respectively. The RF model showed the best result for CT input with 0.96 (± 0.04) validation AUC and 90% (± 6%) validation accuracy. CONCLUSION: Radiomics features can differentiate between FDG-avid breast cancer metastatic and FDG-avid COVID-19 vaccine-related axillary lymphadenopathy. Such a model may have a role in differentiating benign nodes from malignant ones. KEY POINTS: • Patients who were vaccinated with the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine have shown FDG-avid reactive axillary lymph nodes in PET-CT scans. • We evaluated if radiomics and machine learning can distinguish between FDG-avid metastatic axillary lymphadenopathy in breast cancer patients and FDG-avid reactive axillary lymph nodes. • Combined PET and CT radiomics data showed good test AUC (0.98) for distinguishing between metastatic axillary lymphadenopathy and post-COVID-19 vaccine-associated axillary lymphadenopathy. Therefore, the use of radiomics may have a role in differentiating between benign from malignant FDG-avid nodes.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Lymphadenopathy , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Female , Fluorodeoxyglucose F18 , Humans , Lymph Nodes/diagnostic imaging , Lymph Nodes/pathology , Lymphadenopathy/diagnostic imaging , Lymphadenopathy/etiology , Lymphadenopathy/pathology , Lymphatic Metastasis/pathology , Pilot Projects , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography , Retrospective Studies , Vaccination , Vaccines, Synthetic , mRNA Vaccines
11.
Cir Cir ; 90(3): 410-413, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1988867

ABSTRACT

The differential diagnosis of the metastatic axillary lymphadenopathies of breast cancer with which they occur secondary to the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine against COVID-19, is imperative. In a series of cases, we analyzed the characteristics of unilateral axillary lymphadenopathy in patients after Pfizer-BioNTech vaccination. Axillary lymphadenopathy were observed ipsilateral to the vaccination arm. The axillary ultrasound defined these as reactive and that they disappeared in 3 weeks. The pathological findings were benign. The anamnesis, the place and date of vaccination and the radiological findings, play an essential role to carry out a correct differential diagnosis and follow-up of these adenopathies.


El diagnóstico diferencial de las adenopatías axilares metastásicas del cáncer de mama con las que se producen secundarias a la vacuna de Pfizer-BioNTech contra la COVID-19 es imperioso. Analizamos una serie de casos con las características de las adenopatías axilares unilaterales tras la administración de la vacuna de Pfizer-BioNTech. Se observaron adenopatías axilares homolaterales al brazo de vacunación. La ecografía axilar las definió como reactivas y que desaparecían en 3 semanas. Los hallazgos anatomopatológicos fueron de benignidad. La anamnesis, el lugar y la fecha de vacunación, así como los hallazgos radiológicos, desempeñan un papel esencial para realizar un correcto diagnóstico deferencial y el seguimiento de estas adenopatías.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Lymphadenopathy , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Lymphadenopathy/etiology , Lymphatic Metastasis , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
12.
Cancer Causes Control ; 33(10): 1313-1323, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1982204

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: We calculated rates of breast and prostate cancer screening and diagnostic procedures performed during the COVID-19 pandemic through December 2021 compared to the same months in 2019 in a large healthcare provider group in central Massachusetts. METHODS: We included active patients of the provider group between January 2019 and December 2021 aged 30-85 years. Monthly rates of screening mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis, breast MRI, total prostate specific antigen (PSA), and breast or prostate biopsy per 1,000 people were compared by year overall, by age, and race/ethnicity. Completed procedures were identified by relevant codes in electronic health record data. RESULTS: Rates of screening mammography, tomosynthesis, and PSA testing reached the lowest levels in April-May 2020. Breast cancer screening rates decreased 43% in March and 99% in April and May 2020, compared to 2019. Breast cancer screening rates increased gradually beginning in June 2020 through 2021, although more slowly in Black and Hispanic women and in women aged 75-85. PSA testing rates decreased 34% in March, 78% in April, and 53% in May 2020, but rebounded to pre-pandemic levels by June 2020; trends were similar across groups defined by age and race/ethnicity. CONCLUSION: The observed decline in two common screening procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic reflects the impact of the pandemic on cancer early detection and signals potential downstream effects on the prognosis of delayed cancer diagnoses. The slower rate of return for breast cancer screening procedures in certain subgroups should be investigated to ensure all women return for routine screenings.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Prostatic Neoplasms , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Humans , Male , Mammography/methods , Mass Screening/methods , Pandemics , Prostate-Specific Antigen , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Prostatic Neoplasms/epidemiology
13.
Am J Surg ; 224(5): 1222-1228, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1966292

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Breast Cancer (BC) is the most common cancer in women in the United States. The COVID-19 pandemic affected healthcare delivery throughout North America. Breast cancer diagnosis and management was similarly affected. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review to determine the impact of COVID-19 on BC care and the impact on patients' well-being. RESULTS: Our review found that the pandemic led to changes in screenings, biopsies, medical therapy, and surgery. Constraints of the pandemic left patients without resources to navigate the emotional toll from social distancing. There was a disparity in patients' perceptions of the impact of the pandemic on BC care. CONCLUSION: Although the pandemic altered medical care in general, we found that the impact on breast cancer care was counterintuitively not as significant as predicted. However, the pandemic did impact breast cancer patients' mental well-being. This highlights the importance of properly communicating, in real-time, guidelines on breast cancer management to allay the fears of the general public.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Humans , Female , United States , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Delivery of Health Care , North America/epidemiology
14.
AJR Am J Roentgenol ; 219(4): 559-568, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1963272

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND. The variable clinical course of subclinical lymphadenopathy detected on breast imaging after COVID-19 vaccination creates management challenges and has led to evolving practice recommendations. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to assess the duration of axillary lymphadenopathy ipsilateral to COVID-19 vaccination detected by breast imaging and to assess factors associated with the time until resolution. METHODS. This retrospective single-center study included 111 patients (mean age, 52 ± 12 years) with unilateral axillary lymphadenopathy ipsilateral to mRNA COVID-19 vaccine administration performed within the prior 8 weeks that was detected on breast ultrasound performed between January 1, 2021, and October 1, 2021, and who underwent follow-up ultrasound examinations at 4- to 12-week intervals until resolution of the lymphadenopathy. Patient information was extracted from medical records. Cortical thickness of the largest axillary lymph node on ultrasound was retrospectively measured and was considered enlarged when greater than 3 mm. Multivariable linear regression analysis was used to identify independent predictors of time until resolution. RESULTS. The mean cortical thickness at the initial ultrasound examination was 4.7 ± 1.2 mm. The lymphadenopathy resolved a mean of 97 ± 44 days after the initial ultrasound examination, 127 ± 43 days after the first vaccine dose, and 2.4 ± 0.6 follow-up ultrasound examinations. A significant independent predictor of shorter time to resolution was Pfizer-BioNTech (rather than Moderna) vaccination (ß = -18.0 [95% CI, -34.3 to -1.7]; p = .03]. Significant independent predictors of longer time to resolution were receipt of the second dose after the initial ultrasound examination (ß = 19.2 [95% CI, 3.1-35.2]; p = .02) and greater cortical thickness at the initial ultrasound examination (ß = 8.0 [95% CI, 1.5-14.5]; p = .02). Patient age, history of breast cancer, and axillary symptoms were not significantly associated with time to resolution (all p > .05). CONCLUSION. Axillary lymphadenopathy detected with breast ultrasound after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination lasts longer than reported in initial vaccine clinical trials. CLINICAL IMPACT. The prolonged time to resolution supports not delaying screening mammography because of recent COVID-19 vaccination. It also supports the professional society recommendation of a follow-up interval of at least 12 weeks when vaccine-related lymphadenopathy is suspected.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Lymphadenopathy , Adult , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Early Detection of Cancer , Female , Humans , Lymphadenopathy/diagnostic imaging , Lymphadenopathy/etiology , Lymphatic Metastasis , Mammography , Middle Aged , RNA, Messenger/therapeutic use , Retrospective Studies
16.
J Clin Pathol ; 75(8): 514-518, 2022 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1950226

ABSTRACT

In breast cancer, the quality of the pathology services is of paramount importance as inevitably, the pathologist makes the confirmatory diagnosis and provides prognostic and predictive information, informing treatment plans directly. Various national and international organisations provide a pathology reporting minimum dataset (MDS) to ensure consistency in reporting. While the use of MDS promotes clarity, there may be specific areas requiring the pathologist's input for individual patients and hence pathologists need to be aware of the clinical utility of pathology data to help tailor individualised patient treatment. In this article, we provide numerous examples of the role of pathology data in determining next steps in the patient pathway that are applicable to both the diagnostic and treatment pathways, including neoadjuvant treatment pathways. We also briefly discuss the important role and thereby the clinical utility of pathology data during the COVID-19 pandemic providing a template for the similar scenarios in the future if required.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Breast , Datasets as Topic , Breast/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/therapy , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Pandemics , Pathologists
17.
Eur J Radiol ; 154: 110438, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1914325

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to assess the potential of quantitative image analysis and machine learning techniques to differentiate between malignant lymph nodes and benign lymph nodes affected by reactive changes due to COVID-19 vaccination. METHOD: In this institutional review board-approved retrospective study, we improved our previously published artificial intelligence model, by retraining it with newly collected images and testing its performance on images containing benign lymph nodes affected by COVID-19 vaccination. All the images were acquired and selected by specialized breast-imaging radiologists and the nature of each node (benign or malignant) was assessed through a strict clinical protocol using ultrasound-guided biopsies. RESULTS: A total of 180 new images from 154 different patients were recruited: 71 images (10 cases and 61 controls) were used to retrain the old model and 109 images (36 cases and 73 controls) were used to evaluate its performance. The achieved accuracy of the proposed method was 92.7% with 77.8% sensitivity and 100% specificity at the optimal cut-off point. In comparison, the visual node inspection made by radiologists from ultrasound images reached 69.7% accuracy with 41.7% sensitivity and 83.6% specificity. CONCLUSIONS: The results obtained in this study show the potential of the proposed techniques to differentiate between malignant lymph nodes and benign nodes affected by reactive changes due to COVID-19 vaccination. These techniques could be useful to non-invasively diagnose lymph node status in patients with suspicious reactive nodes, although larger multicenter studies are needed to confirm and validate the results.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Artificial Intelligence , Axilla , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Female , Humans , Lymph Nodes/diagnostic imaging , Lymph Nodes/pathology , Lymphatic Metastasis/diagnostic imaging , Lymphatic Metastasis/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Sensitivity and Specificity , Vaccination
18.
In Vivo ; 36(4): 1977-1981, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1904089

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/AIM: COVID-19 has been a global pandemic for more than 2 years, and vaccination against COVID-19 using an mRNA vaccine is widespread. The COVID-19 vaccination can cause specific side-effects, such as axillary lymph node swelling; therefore, breast oncologists should pay attention to such occurrences. Initially, only two COVID-19 vaccinations were planned; however, in some countries third or fourth vaccines have been administered. Here, we present a female case who developed axillary lymph node swelling after her third vaccination. We have also reviewed the literature regarding this side-effect after a third or fourth COVID-19 vaccination. CASE REPORT: A 64-year-old woman who came to our clinic regarding a mammography abnormality in her left breast. She had no palpable mass, but a left breast mass was shown by mammography, and ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging indicated a hamartoma. At 2 months after her second COVID-19 vaccination when she underwent these tests, she had no axillary lymph node swelling. We planned a follow-up after 6 months. At her next visit, by chance, she underwent ultrasonography 14 days after she received a third COVID-19 vaccination, and a swollen axillary lymph node was observed. CONCLUSION: Axillary lymph node swelling can occur after a third COVID-19 vaccination. Therefore, breast oncologists will have to consider this side-effect of COVID-19 vaccination when diagnosing breast tumors.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Axilla/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Japan , Lymph Nodes/pathology , Lymphatic Metastasis/pathology , Middle Aged , Vaccination/adverse effects , Vaccines, Synthetic
19.
BJS Open ; 6(3)2022 05 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1890878

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Following therapeutic mammoplasty (TM), the contralateral breast may require a later balancing procedure to optimize shape and symmetry. The alternative is to offer patients simultaneous TM with immediate contralateral symmetrization via a dual-surgeon approach, with the goal of reducing costs and minimizing the number of subsequent hospital appointments in an era of COVID-19 surges. The aim of this cost-consequence analysis is to characterize the cost-benefit of immediate bilateral symmetrization dual-operator mammoplasty versus staged unilateral single operator for breast cancer surgery. METHOD: A prospective single-centre observational study was conducted at an academic teaching centre for breast cancer surgery in the UK. Pseudonymized data for clinicopathological variables and procedural care information, including the type of initial breast-conserving surgery and subsequent reoperation(s), were extracted from the electronic patient record. Financial data were retrieved using the Patient-Level Information and Costing Systems. RESULTS: Between April 2014 and March 2020, 232 women received either immediate bilateral (n = 44), staged unilateral (n = 57) for breast cancer, or unilateral mammoplasty alone (n = 131). The median (interquartile range (i.q.r.)) additional cost of unilateral mammoplasty with staged versus immediate bilateral mammoplasty was €5500 (€4330 to €6570) per patient (P < 0.001), which represents a total supplementary financial burden of €313 462 to the study institution. There was no significant difference between groups in age, Charlson comorbidity index, operating minutes, time to adjuvant radiotherapy in months, or duration of hospital stay. CONCLUSION: Synchronous dual-surgeon immediate bilateral TM can deliver safe immediate symmetrization and is financially beneficial, without delay to receipt of adjuvant therapy, or additional postoperative morbidity.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Mammaplasty , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Female , Humans , Mammaplasty/methods , Mastectomy, Segmental/methods , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
20.
In Vivo ; 36(3): 1333-1336, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1818960

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/AIM: COVID-19 vaccination is now performed in most of the world to limit the spread of the disease. The first mRNA vaccine was approved in clinical settings and has specific side effects including axillary lymph node swelling, which can be misdiagnosed as breast cancer metastasis. The timing of axillary lymph node swelling and its duration are unclear. Here, we present a Japanese case and review of the existing literature. CASE REPORT: We report the case of a 67-year-old woman with breast calcification. She had regular follow ups in our hospital for this calcification and received ultrasonography of the breast and axilla at every visit. She visited 6 months before having her COVID-19 vaccination, and 7 days and 6 months after the first COVID-19 vaccination. She had a swollen axillary lymph node 7 days after the first vaccination, which although it was improved, remained for 6 months. CONCLUSION: Axillary lymph node swelling occurred 7 days after vaccination and remained up to 6 months after it.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Neoplasms, Second Primary , Aged , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Japan , Lymph Nodes/pathology , Lymphatic Metastasis/pathology , Neoplasms, Second Primary/pathology , Vaccination/adverse effects , Vaccines, Synthetic , mRNA Vaccines
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL