Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
6 result(s) for "Massafra Roberta"
Sort by:
The role of immune suppression in COVID-19 hospitalization: clinical and epidemiological trends over three years of SARS-CoV-2 epidemic
Specific immune suppression types have been associated with a greater risk of severe COVID-19 disease and death. We analyzed data from patients >17 years that were hospitalized for COVID-19 at the “Fondazione IRCCS Ca′ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico” in Milan (Lombardy, Northern Italy). The study included 1727 SARS-CoV-2-positive patients (1,131 males, median age of 65 years) hospitalized between February 2020 and November 2022. Of these, 321 (18.6%, CI: 16.8–20.4%) had at least one condition defining immune suppression. Immune suppressed subjects were more likely to have other co-morbidities (80.4% vs. 69.8%, p  < 0.001) and be vaccinated (37% vs. 12.7%, p  < 0.001). We evaluated the contribution of immune suppression to hospitalization during the various stages of the epidemic and investigated whether immune suppression contributed to severe outcomes and death, also considering the vaccination status of the patients. The proportion of immune suppressed patients among all hospitalizations (initially stable at <20%) started to increase around December 2021, and remained high (30–50%). This change coincided with an increase in the proportions of older patients and patients with co-morbidities and with a decrease in the proportion of patients with severe outcomes. Vaccinated patients showed a lower proportion of severe outcomes; among non-vaccinated patients, severe outcomes were more common in immune suppressed individuals. Immune suppression was a significant predictor of severe outcomes, after adjusting for age, sex, co-morbidities, period of hospitalization, and vaccination status (OR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.23–2.19), while vaccination was a protective factor (OR: 0.31; 95% IC: 0.20–0.47). However, after November 2021, differences in disease outcomes between vaccinated and non-vaccinated groups (for both immune suppressed and immune competent subjects) disappeared. Since December 2021, the spread of the less virulent Omicron variant and an overall higher level of induced and/or natural immunity likely contributed to the observed shift in hospitalized patient characteristics. Nonetheless, vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, likely in combination with naturally acquired immunity, effectively reduced severe outcomes in both immune competent (73.9% vs. 48.2%, p  < 0.001) and immune suppressed (66.4% vs. 35.2%, p  < 0.001) patients, confirming previous observations about the value of the vaccine in preventing serious disease.
Prediction of Breast Cancer Histological Outcome by Radiomics and Artificial Intelligence Analysis in Contrast-Enhanced Mammography
Purpose: To evaluate radiomics features in order to: differentiate malignant versus benign lesions; predict low versus moderate and high grading; identify positive or negative hormone receptors; and discriminate positive versus negative human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 related to breast cancer. Methods: A total of 182 patients with known breast lesions and that underwent Contrast-Enhanced Mammography were enrolled in this retrospective study. The reference standard was pathology (118 malignant lesions and 64 benign lesions). A total of 837 textural metrics were extracted by manually segmenting the region of interest from both craniocaudally (CC) and mediolateral oblique (MLO) views. Non-parametric Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney test, receiver operating characteristic, logistic regression and tree-based machine learning algorithms were used. The Adaptive Synthetic Sampling balancing approach was used and a feature selection process was implemented. Results: In univariate analysis, the classification of malignant versus benign lesions achieved the best performance when considering the original_gldm_DependenceNonUniformity feature extracted on CC view (accuracy of 88.98%). An accuracy of 83.65% was reached in the classification of grading, whereas a slightly lower value of accuracy (81.65%) was found in the classification of the presence of the hormone receptor; the features extracted were the original_glrlm_RunEntropy and the original_gldm_DependenceNonUniformity, respectively. The results of multivariate analysis achieved the best performances when using two or more features as predictors for classifying malignant versus benign lesions from CC view images (max test accuracy of 95.83% with a non-regularized logistic regression). Considering the features extracted from MLO view images, the best test accuracy (91.67%) was obtained when predicting the grading using a classification-tree algorithm. Combinations of only two features, extracted from both CC and MLO views, always showed test accuracy values greater than or equal to 90.00%, with the only exception being the prediction of the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, where the best performance (test accuracy of 89.29%) was obtained with the random forest algorithm. Conclusions: The results confirm that the identification of malignant breast lesions and the differentiation of histological outcomes and some molecular subtypes of tumors (mainly positive hormone receptor tumors) can be obtained with satisfactory accuracy through both univariate and multivariate analysis of textural features extracted from Contrast-Enhanced Mammography images.
Machine and Deep Learning on Radiomic Features from Contrast-Enhanced Mammography and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Breast Cancer Characterization
Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of machine and deep learning approaches on radiomics features obtained by Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (DCE-MRI) and contrast enhanced mammography (CEM) in the characterization of breast cancer and in the prediction of the tumor molecular profile. Methods: A total of 153 patients with malignant and benign lesions were analyzed and underwent MRI examinations. Considering the histological findings as the ground truth, three different types of findings were used in the analysis: (1) benign versus malignant lesions; (2) G1 + G2 vs. G3 classification; (3) the presence of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2+ vs. HER2−). Radiomic features (n = 851) were extracted from manually segmented regions of interest using the PyRadiomics platform, following IBSI-compliant protocols. Highly correlated features were excluded, and the remaining features were standardized using z-score normalization. A feature selection process based on Elastic Net regularization (α = 0.5) was used to reduce dimensionality. Synthetic balancing of the training data was applied using the ROSE method to address class imbalance. Model performance was evaluated using repeated 10-fold cross-validation and AUC-based metrics. Results: Among the 153 patients enrolled in the studies, 113 were malignant lesions. Among the 113 malignant lesions, 32 had high grading (G3) and 66 had the HER2+ receptor. Radiomic features derived from both CEM and DCE-MRI showed strong discriminative performance for malignancy detection, with several features achieving AUCs above 0.80. Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM) achieved the highest accuracy (0.911) and AUC (0.907) in differentiating benign from malignant lesions. For tumor grading, the neural network model attained the best accuracy (0.848), while LASSO yielded the highest sensitivity (0.667) for detecting high-grade tumors. In predicting HER2+ status, the neural network also performed best (AUC = 0.669), with a sensitivity of 0.842. Conclusions: Radiomics-based machine learning models applied to multiparametric CEM and DCE-MRI images offer promising, non-invasive tools for breast cancer characterization. The models effectively distinguished benign from malignant lesions and showed potential in predicting histological grade and HER2 status. These results demonstrate that radiomic features extracted from CEM and DCE-MRI, when analyzed through machine and deep learning models, can support accurate breast cancer characterization. Such models may assist clinicians in early diagnosis, histological grading, and biomarker assessment, potentially enhancing personalized treatment planning and non-invasive decision-making in routine practice.
Neutralizing antibodies to Omicron after the fourth SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine dose in immunocompromised patients highlight the need of additional boosters
Immunocompromised patients have been shown to have an impaired immune response to COVID-19 vaccines. Here we compared the B-cell, T-cell and neutralizing antibody response to WT and Omicron BA.2 SARS-CoV-2 virus after the fourth dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in patients with hematological malignancies (HM, n=71), solid tumors (ST, n=39) and immune-rheumatological (IR, n=25) diseases. The humoral and T-cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination were analyzed by quantifying the anti-RBD antibodies, their neutralization activity and the IFN-γ released after spike specific stimulation. We show that the T-cell response is similarly boosted by the fourth dose across the different subgroups, while the antibody response is improved only in patients not receiving B-cell targeted therapies, independent on the pathology. However, 9% of patients with anti-RBD antibodies did not have neutralizing antibodies to either virus variants, while an additional 5.7% did not have neutralizing antibodies to Omicron BA.2, making these patients particularly vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The increment of neutralizing antibodies was very similar towards Omicron BA.2 and WT virus after the third or fourth dose of vaccine, suggesting that there is no preferential skewing towards either virus variant with the booster dose. The only limited step is the amount of antibodies that are elicited after vaccination, thus increasing the probability of developing neutralizing antibodies to both variants of virus. These data support the recommendation of additional booster doses in frail patients to enhance the development of a B-cell response directed against Omicron and/or to enhance the T-cell response in patients treated with anti-CD20.