Explore the vast range of titles available.

Women with a genetic predisposition to breast cancer tend to develop the disease at a younger age with denser breasts making mammography screening less effective. The introduction of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for familial breast cancer screening programs in recent years was intended to improve outcomes in these women. We aimed to assess whether introduction of MRI surveillance improves 5- and 10-year survival of high-risk women and determine the accuracy of MRI breast cancer detection compared with mammography-only or no enhanced surveillance and compare size and pathology of cancers detected in women screened with MRI + mammography and mammography only. We used data from two prospective studies where asymptomatic women with a very high breast cancer risk were screened by either mammography alone or with MRI also compared with BRCA1/2 carriers with no intensive surveillance. 63 cancers were detected in women receiving MRI + mammography and 76 in women receiving mammography only. Sensitivity of MRI + mammography was 93 % with 63 % specificity. Fewer cancers detected on MRI were lymph node positive compared to mammography/no additional screening. There were no differences in 10-year survival between the MRI + mammography and mammography-only groups, but survival was significantly higher in the MRI-screened group (95.3 %) compared to no intensive screening (73.7 %; p  = 0.002). There were no deaths among the 21 BRCA2 carriers receiving MRI. There appears to be benefit from screening with MRI, particularly in BRCA2 carriers. Extended follow-up of larger numbers of high-risk women is required to assess long-term survival.

Background In principle, risk-stratification as a routine part of the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) should produce a better balance of benefits and harms. The main benefit is the offer of NICE-approved more frequent screening and/ or chemoprevention for women who are at increased risk, but are unaware of this. We have developed BC-Predict, to be offered to women when invited to NHSBSP which collects information on risk factors (self-reported information on family history and hormone-related factors via questionnaire; mammographic density; and in a sub-sample, Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms). BC-Predict produces risk feedback letters, inviting women at high risk (≥8% 10-year) or moderate risk (≥5 to < 8% 10-year) to have discussion of prevention and early detection options at Family History, Risk and Prevention Clinics. Despite the promise of systems such as BC-Predict, there are still too many uncertainties for a fully-powered definitive trial to be appropriate or ethical. The present research aims to identify these key uncertainties regarding the feasibility of integrating BC-Predict into the NHSBSP. Key objectives of the present research are to quantify important potential benefits and harms, and identify key drivers of the relative cost-effectiveness of embedding BC-Predict into NHSBSP. Methods A non-randomised fully counterbalanced study design will be used, to include approximately equal numbers of women offered NHSBSP ( n  = 18,700) and BC-Predict ( n  = 18,700) from selected screening sites ( n  = 7). In the initial 8-month time period, women eligible for NHSBSP will be offered BC-Predict in four screening sites. Three screening sites will offer women usual NHSBSP. In the following 8-months the study sites offering usual NHSBSP switch to BC-Predict and vice versa. Key potential benefits including uptake of risk consultations, chemoprevention and additional screening will be obtained for both groups. Key potential harms such as increased anxiety will be obtained via self-report questionnaires, with embedded qualitative process analysis. A decision-analytic model-based cost-effectiveness analysis will identify the key uncertainties underpinning the relative cost-effectiveness of embedding BC-Predict into NHSBSP. Discussion We will assess the feasibility of integrating BC-Predict into the NHSBSP, and identify the main uncertainties for a definitive evaluation of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of BC-Predict. Trial registration Retrospectively registered with clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT04359420 ).

Successful implantation requires the coordinated migration and invasion of trophoblast cells from out of the blastocyst and into the endometrium. This process relies on signals produced by cells in the maternal endometrium. However, the relative contribution of stroma cells remains unclear. The study of human implantation has major technical limitations, therefore the need of in vitro models to elucidate the molecular mechanisms. Using a recently described 3D in vitro models we evaluated the interaction between trophoblasts and human endometrial stroma cells (hESC), we assessed the process of trophoblast migration and invasion in the presence of stroma derived factors. We demonstrate that hESC promotes trophoblast invasion through the generation of an inflammatory environment modulated by TNF-α. We also show the role of stromal derived IL-17 as a promoter of trophoblast migration through the induction of essential genes that confer invasive capacity to cells of the trophectoderm. In conclusion, we describe the characterization of a cellular inflammatory network that may be important for blastocyst implantation. Our findings provide a new insight into the complexity of the implantation process and reveal the importance of inflammation for embryo implantation.

Background Understanding healthcare professionals' (HCPs) experiences of caring for women with false‐positive screening test results in the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) is important for reducing the impact of such results. Methods Interviews were undertaken with 12 HCPs from a single NHSBSP unit, including advanced radiographer practitioners, breast radiographers, breast radiologists, clinical nurse specialists (CNSs), and a radiology healthcare assistant. Data were analysed thematically using Template Analysis. Results Two themes were produced: (1) Gauging and navigating women's anxiety during screening assessment was an inevitable and necessary task for all participants. CNSs were perceived as particularly adept at this, while breast radiographers reported a lack of adequate formal training. (2) Controlling the delivery of information to women (including amount, type and timing of information). HCPs reported various communication strategies to facilitate women's information processing and retention during a distressing time. Conclusions Women's anxiety could be reduced through dedicated CNS support, but this should not replace support from other HCPs. Breast radiographers may benefit from more training to emotionally support recalled women. While HCPs emphasised taking a patient‐centred communication approach, the use of other strategies (e.g., standardised scripts) and the constraints of the ‘one‐stop shop’ model pose challenges to such an approach. Patient and Public Contribution During the study design, two Patient and Public Involvement members (women with false‐positive‐breast screening test results) were consulted to gain an understanding of patient perspectives and experiences of being recalled specifically in the NHSBSP. Their feedback informed the formulations of the research aim, objectives and the direction of the interview guide.

In England, participation in breast cancer screening has been decreasing in the past 10 years, approaching the national minimum standard of 70%. Interventions aimed at improving participation need to be investigated and put into practice to stop this downward trend. We assessed the effect on participation of sending invitations for breast screening with a timed appointment to women who did not attend their first offered appointment within the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP). In this open, randomised controlled trial, women in six centres in the NHSBSP in England who were invited for routine breast cancer screening were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive an invitation to a second appointment with fixed date and time (intervention) or an invitation letter with a telephone number to call to book their new screening appointment (control) in the event of non-attendance at the first offered appointment. Randomisation was by SX number, a sequential unique identifier of each woman within the NHSBSP, and at the beginning of the study a coin toss decided whether women with odd or even SX numbers would be allocated to the intervention group. Women aged 50–70 years who did not attend their first offered appointment were eligible for the analysis. The primary endpoint was participation (ie, attendance at breast cancer screening) within 90 days of the date of the first offered appointment; we used Poisson regression to compare the proportion of women who participated in screening in the study groups. All analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with Barts Health, number 009304QM. We obtained 33 146 records of women invited for breast cancer screening at the six centres between June 2, 2014, and Sept 30, 2015, who did not attend their first offered appointment. 26 054 women were eligible for this analysis (12 807 in the intervention group and 13 247 in the control group). Participation within 90 days of the first offered appointment was significantly higher in the intervention group (2861 [22%] of 12 807) than in the control group (1632 [12%] of 13 247); relative risk of participation 1·81 (95% CI 1·70–1·93; p<0·0001). These findings show that a policy of second appointments with fixed date and time for non-attenders of breast screening is effective in improving participation. This strategy can be easily implemented by the screening sites and, if combined with simple interventions, could further increase participation and ensure an upward shift in the participation trend nationally. Whether the policy should vary by time since last attended screen will have to be considered. National Health Service Cancer Screening Programmes and Department of Health Policy Research Programme.

PurposeThe introduction of breast screening in the UK led to an increase in the detection of non-invasive breast neoplasia, predominantly ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), a non-obligatory precursor of invasive breast cancer. The Sloane Project, a UK prospective cohort study of screen-detected non-invasive breast neoplasia, commenced in 2003 to evaluate the radiological assessment, surgical management, pathology, adjuvant therapy and outcomes for non-invasive breast neoplasia. Long-term follow-up and accurate data collection are essential to examine the clinical impact. Here, we describe the establishment, development and analytical processes for this large UK cohort study.ParticipantsWomen diagnosed with non-invasive breast neoplasia via the UK National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) from 01 April 2003 are eligible, with a minimum age of 46 years. Diagnostic, therapeutic and follow-up data collected via proformas, complement date and cause of death from national data sources. Accrual for patients with DCIS ceased in 2012 but is ongoing for patients with epithelial atypia/in situ neoplasia, while follow-up for all continues long term.Findings to dateTo date, patients within the Sloane cohort comprise one-third of those diagnosed with DCIS within the NHSBSP and are representative of UK practice. DCIS has a variable outcome and confirms the need for longer-term follow-up for screen-detected DCIS. However, the radiology and pathology features of DCIS can be used to inform patient management. We demonstrate validation of follow-up information collected from national datasets against traditional, manual methods.Future plansConclusions derived from the Sloane Project are generalisable to women in the UK with screen-detected DCIS. The follow-up methodology may be extended to other UK cohort studies and routine clinical follow-up. Data from English patients entered into the Sloane Project are available on request to researchers under data sharing agreement. Annual follow-up data collection will continue for a minimum of 20 years.

Background The differences between breast cancer risk factors in white British/Irish and Asian women attending screening in the UK are not well documented. Methods Between 2009-15 ethnicity and traditional breast cancer risk factors were self-identified by a screening cohort from Greater Manchester, with follow up to 2016. Risk factors and incidence rates were compared using age-standardised statistics (European standard population). Results Eight hundred and seventy-nine Asian women and 51,779 unaffected white British/Irish women aged 46-73 years were recruited. Asian women were at lower predicted breast cancer risk from hormonal and reproductive risk factors than white British/Irish women (mean 10 year risk 2.6% vs 3.1%, difference 0.4%, 95%CI 0.3-0.5%). White British/Irish women were more likely to have had a younger age at menarche, be overweight or obese, taller, used hormone replacement therapy and not to have had children.. However, despite being less overweight Asian women had gained more weight from age 20 years and were less likely to undertake moderate physical activity. Asian women also had a slightly higher mammographic density. Asian age-standardised incidence was 3.2 (95%CI 1.6-5.2, 18 cancers) per thousand women/year vs 4.5 (95%CI 4.2-4.8, 1076 cancers) for white British/Irish women. Conclusions Asian women attending screening in Greater Manchester are likely to have a lower risk of breast cancer than white British/Irish women, but they undertake less physical activity and have more adult weight gain.

IntroductionObesity and overweight are strong potentially modifiable risk factors for postmenopausal breast and endometrial cancer. Bariatric surgery can achieve considerable weight loss and risk reduction of weight-related cancer but is unlikely to be a feasible cancer prevention strategy. Total diet replacement (TDR) can also lead to significant weight reduction. This study aims to examine the cellular and molecular changes in breast and endometrial tissue in high-risk women following TDR-induced weight loss, as well as longer-term adherence to a 12-month TDR weight loss intervention.Methods and analysisPROBE-TDR (PRevention Of Breast and Endometrial cancer using Total Diet Replacement) is a prospective, non-blinded, randomised controlled trial of 47 women at increased risk of breast and/or endometrial cancer. Randomisation is 2:1 to either an immediate 12-month TDR weight loss programme (n=31) or delayed dietary intervention (control) (n=16). The TDR programme includes an initial 12-week period of TDR (850 kcal/day) followed by a 40-week food-based diet, based on the nutritional principles of a Mediterranean diet, as either continued weight loss (~1500 kcal/day) or weight loss maintenance (~2000 kcal/day). Menstrual phase-matched biopsies of the breast and endometrium will be assessed at baseline and at the end of the 12-week TDR in the immediate diet group, compared with women randomised to the control group following their usual diet. The trial will also assess longer-term adherence and weight loss success across the 12-month programme in both the immediate and control groups.Ethics and disseminationApproval for this study has been obtained from the Health Research Authority and Health and Care Research Wales (approval 20/NW/0095). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences and shared with trial participants.Trial registration numberInternational Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Registry (ISRCTN15358157).

PurposeWire localization has several disadvantages, notably wire migration and difficulty scheduling the procedure close to surgery. Radioactive seed localization overcomes these disadvantages, but implementation is limited due to radiation safety requirements. Magnetic seeds potentially offer the logistical benefits and transcutaneous detection equivalence of a radioactive seed, with easier implementation. This study was designed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of using magnetic seeds for breast lesion localization.MethodsA two-centre open-label cohort study to assess the feasibility and safety of magnetic seed (Magseed) localization of breast lesions. Magseeds were placed under radiological guidance into women having total mastectomy surgery. The primary outcome measure was seed migration distance. Secondary outcome measures included accuracy of placement, ease of transcutaneous detection, seed integrity and safety.ResultsTwenty-nine Magseeds were placed into the breasts of 28 patients under ultrasound guidance. There was no migration of the seeds between placement and surgery. Twenty-seven seeds were placed directly in the target lesion with the other seeds being 2 and 3 mm away. All seeds were detectable transcutaneously in all breast sizes and at all depths. There were no complications or safety issues.ConclusionsMagnetic seeds are a feasible and safe method of breast lesion localization. They can be accurately placed, demonstrate no migration in this feasibility study and are detectable in all sizes and depths of breast tissue. Now that safety and feasibility have been demonstrated, further clinical studies are required to evaluate the seed’s effectiveness in wide local excision surgery.

PurposeTo improve breast cancer risk stratification to enable more targeted early detection/prevention strategies that will better balance risks and benefits of population screening programmes.Methods9362 of 57,902 women in the Predicting-Risk-Of-Cancer-At-Screening (PROCAS) study who were unaffected by breast cancer at study entry and provided DNA for a polygenic risk score (PRS). The PRS was analysed alongside mammographic density (density-residual-DR) and standard risk factors (Tyrer-Cuzick-model) to assess future risk of breast cancer based on tumour stage receptor expression and pathology.Results195 prospective incident breast cancers had a prediction based on TC/DR/PRS which was informative for subsequent breast cancer overall [IQ-OR 2.25 (95% CI 1.89–2.68)] with excellent calibration-(0.99). The model performed particularly well in predicting higher stage stage 2+ IQ-OR 2.69 (95% CI 2.02–3.60) and ER + BCs (IQ-OR 2.36 (95% CI 1.93–2.89)). DR was most predictive for HER2+ and stage 2+ cancers but did not discriminate as well between poor and extremely good prognosis BC as either Tyrer-Cuzick or PRS. In contrast, PRS gave the highest OR for incident stage 2+ cancers, [IQR-OR 1.79 (95% CI 1.30–2.46)].ConclusionsA combined approach using Tyrer-Cuzick/DR/PRS provides accurate risk stratification, particularly for poor prognosis cancers. This provides support for reducing the screening interval in high-risk women and increasing the screening interval in low-risk women defined by this model.