Microwave Breast Imaging: experimental tumour phantoms for the evaluation of new breast cancer diagnosis systems

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 025036 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bárbara L Oliveira ◽  
Declan O’Loughlin ◽  
Martin O’Halloran ◽  
Emily Porter ◽  
Martin Glavin ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-12
Author(s):  
Hanan S. Gewefel ◽  
◽  
Sophia Michelen ◽  
Bodour Salhia ◽  
Iman Ewais ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 1183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodriguez ◽  
Córdoba ◽  
Aranda ◽  
Álvarez ◽  
Vicioso ◽  
...  

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has emerged as a non-invasive “liquid biopsy” for early breast cancer diagnosis. We evaluated the suitability of ctDNA analysis in the diagnosis of early breast cancer after mammography findings, comparing PIK3CA and TP53 mutations between tumor biopsies and pre-biopsy circulating DNA. Matched plasma and frozen fresh tissue biopsies from patients with Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) 4c/5 mammography findings and subsequent diagnosis of primary breast cancer were analyzed using NGS TruSeq Custom Amplicon Low Input Panel (Illumina) and plasma SafeSEQ (Sysmex Inostics). The same plasma and tumor mutations were observed in eight of 29 patients (27.6%) with four in TP53 and five in PIK3CA mutations. Sequencing analysis also revealed four additional ctDNA mutations (three in TP53 and one in PIK3CA) previously not identified in three patients tissue biopsy. One of these patients had mutations in both genes. Age, tumor grade and size, immunohistochemical (IHC) subtype, BIRADS category, and lymph node positivity were significantly associated with the detectability of these blood tumor-derived mutations. In conclusion, ctDNA analysis could be used in early breast cancer diagnosis, providing critical clinical information to improve patient diagnosis.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniele Ugo Tari ◽  
Aldo Santarsiere ◽  
Fabiola Palermo ◽  
Caterina Desireè Morelli ◽  
Fabio Pinto

Introduction: Since breast imaging requires very close contact with patients, a protocol is needed to perform safe daily screening activities during the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and methods: Patients were triaged and separated into three different clinical scenarios by performing a telephone questionnaire before each diagnostic exam or a nasopharyngeal swab before every recovery. Specific procedures for each scenario are described. Results: From July to October 2020, 994 exams were performed. A total of 16 cancers and 7 suspected COVID-19 patients were identified. No medical were was infected. Conclusion: This protocol is an example of the practical use of guidelines applied to a breast unit to assist specialists in preventing COVID-19 infection and optimizing resources for breast cancer diagnosis.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15533-e15533
Author(s):  
Virginia A. Espina ◽  
Ngoc Vuong ◽  
Alessandra Luchini ◽  
Claudius Mueller ◽  
Denitra S Mack ◽  
...  

e15533 Background: Biomarker identification for early breast cancer diagnosis is confounded by comparing healthy control patients to patients undergoing surgical procedures and stress of a potential cancer diagnosis. We implemented a clinical research protocol that combines biomarker harvesting and identification with Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) results, within a cohort of women with a suspicious mammogram who donated samples prior to biopsy. The primary goals were to discover candidate novel plasma markers for stage I breast cancer versus benign lesions, and validate the markers by mass spectrometry and immunohistochemistry. Methods: 150 women found on screening mammography to have a BIRADS IV or V mammographic abnormality were enrolled in the IRB approved study, with one year follow-up. After informed consent, serum, plasma, and saliva specimens were obtained and frozen. The patient underwent image guided biopsy of the mammographic abnormality. Hydrogel nanoparticles were used to harvest and concentrate low abundance protein biomarkers from plasma. Proteins were identified by mass spectrometry. The BIRADS score and biopsy outcome were blinded to the laboratory researchers. Results: 37/150 women (median age 64, 73% ER+, 70% PR+) were diagnosed with biopsy-proven breast cancer. 15/37 had a family history of breast cancer. Within the context of stress of an abnormal mammogram and invasive biopsy, we identified 5478 plasma peptides. A model to predict endpoints that discriminate cancer vs no cancer was developed using cross-validation and lasso shrinkage method. The best fit multi-analyte ROC/AUC model of peptide spectral matches revealed 10 candidate peptides, including PLAA, TRAPPC9, PROS1, DDX41, ANKRD63, EGFLAM (AUC = 0.81), that discriminated cancer versus no cancer. The functional mechanisms of these proteins are calcium metabolism, GPI anchor biosynthesis, neural-immune crosstalk, DNA repair, and ubiquitin-mediated protein trafficking. Conclusions: Molecular profiling of blood can potentially complement imaging to improve diagnostic specificity in the setting of a suspicious mammogram. This unique trial design, enhanced by nanotechnology protein harvesting, identified potential novel cancer biomarkers in the presence of a suspicious mammogram. A confirmation trial is underway.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document