Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 3/2008

01-12-2008 | Clinical Trial

Is face-only photographic view enough for the aesthetic evaluation of breast cancer conservative treatment?

Authors: Maria João Cardoso, André Magalhães, Teresa Almeida, Susy Costa, Conny Vrieling, David Christie, Jørgen Johansen, Jaime S. Cardoso

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 3/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

The breast cancer conservative treatment. cosmetic results (BCCT.core) is a new software tool created for the automatic and objective evaluation of the aesthetic result of BCCT. It makes use of a face-only photographic view of each patient and might thus have been considered insufficient for an accurate evaluation, as others have used multiple views of each patient. The purpose of this work is to compare the performance of the BCCT.core (using face-only views) with a subjective expert analysis using both the face-only and four-view assessment. Photographs in four-views of 150 patients, were evaluated by a panel of experts and a consensus classification was obtained. The agreement between the consensus and the BCCT.core (face-only view) was calculated using the kappa (k) and weighted kappa (wk) statistics. Face-only views, of the same 150 patients, were subsequently sorted out in a different order and sent for individual evaluation by three specialists from the previous panel of experts. The individual agreement between the face-only view and the four-view evaluation by each of the three experts and the consensus was calculated using the same methods. Obtained results were compared to the BCCT.core performance. The software obtained a moderate agreement with the consensus (k = 0.57; wk = 0.68). The highest value of agreement, from the three experts, between the four-view evaluation and the consensus was identical to the software agreement (k = 0.55; wk = 0.67). In the face-only view experiment, the highest value of agreement between the experts and the consensus was only fair (k = 0.37; wk = 0.54). Performance of the software was thus considered equal to that obtained by experts using a four-view evaluation.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, Margolese RG, Deutsch M, Fisher ER, Jeong JH, Wolmark N (2002) Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347:1233–1241PubMedCrossRef Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, Margolese RG, Deutsch M, Fisher ER, Jeong JH, Wolmark N (2002) Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347:1233–1241PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, Greco M, Saccozzi R, Luini A, Aguilar M, Marubini E (2002) Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347:1227–1232PubMedCrossRef Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, Greco M, Saccozzi R, Luini A, Aguilar M, Marubini E (2002) Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347:1227–1232PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Al-Ghazal SK, Blamey RW (1999) Cosmetic assessment of breast-conserving surgery for primary breast cancer. Breast 8:162–168PubMedCrossRef Al-Ghazal SK, Blamey RW (1999) Cosmetic assessment of breast-conserving surgery for primary breast cancer. Breast 8:162–168PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Christie D (1996) A comparison of methods of cosmetic assessment in breast conservation treatment. Breast 5:358–367CrossRef Christie D (1996) A comparison of methods of cosmetic assessment in breast conservation treatment. Breast 5:358–367CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Sacchini V, Luini A, Tana S, Lozza L, Galimberti V, Merson M, Agresti R, Veronesi P, Greco M (1991) Quantitative and qualitative cosmetic evaluation after conservative treatment for breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 27:1395–1400PubMedCrossRef Sacchini V, Luini A, Tana S, Lozza L, Galimberti V, Merson M, Agresti R, Veronesi P, Greco M (1991) Quantitative and qualitative cosmetic evaluation after conservative treatment for breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 27:1395–1400PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Vrieling C, Collette L, Bartelink E, Borger JH, Brenninkmeyer SJ, Horiot JC, Pierart M, Poortmans PM, Struikmans H, Van der Schueren E, Van Dongen JA, Van Limbergen E, Bartelink H (1999) Validation of the methods of cosmetic assessment after breast-conserving therapy in the eortc “Boost versus no boost” trial. Eortc radiotherapy and breast cancer cooperative groups. European organization for research and treatment of cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 45:667–676PubMed Vrieling C, Collette L, Bartelink E, Borger JH, Brenninkmeyer SJ, Horiot JC, Pierart M, Poortmans PM, Struikmans H, Van der Schueren E, Van Dongen JA, Van Limbergen E, Bartelink H (1999) Validation of the methods of cosmetic assessment after breast-conserving therapy in the eortc “Boost versus no boost” trial. Eortc radiotherapy and breast cancer cooperative groups. European organization for research and treatment of cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 45:667–676PubMed
7.
go back to reference Cardoso MJ, Santos AC, Cardoso J, Barros H, Cardoso De Oliveira M (2005) Choosing observers for evaluation of aesthetic results in breast cancer conservative treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 61:879–881PubMed Cardoso MJ, Santos AC, Cardoso J, Barros H, Cardoso De Oliveira M (2005) Choosing observers for evaluation of aesthetic results in breast cancer conservative treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 61:879–881PubMed
8.
go back to reference Pezner RD, Lipsett JA, Vora NL, Desai KR (1985) Limited usefulness of observer-based cosmesis scales employed to evaluate patients treated conservatively for breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 11:1117–1119PubMed Pezner RD, Lipsett JA, Vora NL, Desai KR (1985) Limited usefulness of observer-based cosmesis scales employed to evaluate patients treated conservatively for breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 11:1117–1119PubMed
9.
go back to reference Pezner RD, Patterson MP, Hill LR, Vora N, Desai KR, Archambeau JO, Lipsett JA (1985) Breast retraction assessment: an objective evaluation of cosmetic results of patients treated conservatively for breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 11:575–578PubMed Pezner RD, Patterson MP, Hill LR, Vora N, Desai KR, Archambeau JO, Lipsett JA (1985) Breast retraction assessment: an objective evaluation of cosmetic results of patients treated conservatively for breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 11:575–578PubMed
10.
go back to reference Van Limbergen E, van der Schueren E, Van Tongelen K (1989) Cosmetic evaluation of breast conserving treatment for mammary cancer. 1. Proposal of a quantitative scoring system. Radiother Oncol 16:159–167PubMedCrossRef Van Limbergen E, van der Schueren E, Van Tongelen K (1989) Cosmetic evaluation of breast conserving treatment for mammary cancer. 1. Proposal of a quantitative scoring system. Radiother Oncol 16:159–167PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Krishnan L, Stanton AL, Collins CA, Liston VE, Jewell WR (2001) Form or function? Part 2. Objective cosmetic and functional correlates of quality of life in women treated with breast-conserving surgical procedures and radiotherapy. Cancer 91:2282–2287PubMedCrossRef Krishnan L, Stanton AL, Collins CA, Liston VE, Jewell WR (2001) Form or function? Part 2. Objective cosmetic and functional correlates of quality of life in women treated with breast-conserving surgical procedures and radiotherapy. Cancer 91:2282–2287PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Harris JR, Levene MB, Svensson G, Hellman S (1979) Analysis of cosmetic results following primary radiation therapy for stages i and ii carcinoma of the breast. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 5:257–261PubMed Harris JR, Levene MB, Svensson G, Hellman S (1979) Analysis of cosmetic results following primary radiation therapy for stages i and ii carcinoma of the breast. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 5:257–261PubMed
13.
go back to reference Cardoso JS, Cardoso MJ (2007) Towards an intelligent medical system for the aesthetic evaluation of breast cancer conservative treatment. Artif Intell Med 40:115–126PubMedCrossRef Cardoso JS, Cardoso MJ (2007) Towards an intelligent medical system for the aesthetic evaluation of breast cancer conservative treatment. Artif Intell Med 40:115–126PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Cardoso MJ, Cardoso J, Amaral N, Azevedo I, Barreau L, Bernardo M, Christie D, Costa S, Fitzal F, Fougo JL, Johansen J, Macmillan D, Mano MP, Regolo L, Rosa J, Teixeira L, Vrieling C (2007) Turning subjective into objective: the BCCT.Core software for evaluation of cosmetic results in breast cancer conservative treatment. Breast 16:456–461PubMedCrossRef Cardoso MJ, Cardoso J, Amaral N, Azevedo I, Barreau L, Bernardo M, Christie D, Costa S, Fitzal F, Fougo JL, Johansen J, Macmillan D, Mano MP, Regolo L, Rosa J, Teixeira L, Vrieling C (2007) Turning subjective into objective: the BCCT.Core software for evaluation of cosmetic results in breast cancer conservative treatment. Breast 16:456–461PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Hasson F, Keeney S, McKenna H (2000) Research guidelines for the delphi survey technique. J Adv Nurs 32:1008–1015PubMedCrossRef Hasson F, Keeney S, McKenna H (2000) Research guidelines for the delphi survey technique. J Adv Nurs 32:1008–1015PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Jones J, Hunter D (1995) Consensus methods for medical and health services research. BMJ 311:376–380PubMed Jones J, Hunter D (1995) Consensus methods for medical and health services research. BMJ 311:376–380PubMed
17.
go back to reference Fink A, Kosecoff J, Chassin M, Brook RH (1984) Consensus methods: Characteristics and guidelines for use. Am J Public Health 74:979–983PubMedCrossRef Fink A, Kosecoff J, Chassin M, Brook RH (1984) Consensus methods: Characteristics and guidelines for use. Am J Public Health 74:979–983PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Cardoso MJ, Cardoso J, Santos AC, Barros H, Oliveira MC (2005) Interobserver agreement, consensus over the esthetic evaluation of conservative treatment for breast cancer. Breast 15:52–57PubMedCrossRef Cardoso MJ, Cardoso J, Santos AC, Barros H, Oliveira MC (2005) Interobserver agreement, consensus over the esthetic evaluation of conservative treatment for breast cancer. Breast 15:52–57PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Seigel DG, Podgor MJ, Remaley NA (1992) Acceptable values of kappa for comparison of two groups. Am J Epidemiol 135:571–578PubMed Seigel DG, Podgor MJ, Remaley NA (1992) Acceptable values of kappa for comparison of two groups. Am J Epidemiol 135:571–578PubMed
20.
go back to reference Al-Ghazal SK, Blamey RW, Stewart J, Morgan AA (1999) The cosmetic outcome in early breast cancer treated with breast conservation. Eur J Surg Oncol 25:566–570PubMedCrossRef Al-Ghazal SK, Blamey RW, Stewart J, Morgan AA (1999) The cosmetic outcome in early breast cancer treated with breast conservation. Eur J Surg Oncol 25:566–570PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Sneeuw KC, Aaronson NK, Yarnold JR, Broderick M, Regan J, Ross G, Goddard A (1992) Cosmetic and functional outcomes of breast conserving treatment for early stage breast cancer. 1. Comparison of patients’ ratings, observers’ ratings, and objective assessments. Radiother Oncol 25:153–159PubMedCrossRef Sneeuw KC, Aaronson NK, Yarnold JR, Broderick M, Regan J, Ross G, Goddard A (1992) Cosmetic and functional outcomes of breast conserving treatment for early stage breast cancer. 1. Comparison of patients’ ratings, observers’ ratings, and objective assessments. Radiother Oncol 25:153–159PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Noguchi M, Miyazaki I (1994) Breast conserving surgery and radiation in the treatment of operable breast cancer. Int Surg 79:142–147PubMed Noguchi M, Miyazaki I (1994) Breast conserving surgery and radiation in the treatment of operable breast cancer. Int Surg 79:142–147PubMed
23.
go back to reference Tsouskas LI, Fentiman IS (1990) Breast compliance: a new method for evaluation of cosmetic outcome after conservative treatment of early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 15:185–190PubMedCrossRef Tsouskas LI, Fentiman IS (1990) Breast compliance: a new method for evaluation of cosmetic outcome after conservative treatment of early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 15:185–190PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Fitzal F, Krois W, Trischler H, Wutzel L, Riedl O, Kuhbelbock U, Wintersteiner B, Cardoso MJ, Dubsky P, Gnant M, Jakesz R, Wild T (2007) The use of a breast symmetry index for objective evaluation of breast cosmesis. Breast 16:429–435PubMedCrossRef Fitzal F, Krois W, Trischler H, Wutzel L, Riedl O, Kuhbelbock U, Wintersteiner B, Cardoso MJ, Dubsky P, Gnant M, Jakesz R, Wild T (2007) The use of a breast symmetry index for objective evaluation of breast cosmesis. Breast 16:429–435PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Zgajnar J (2007) Digital evaluation of breast cosmesis after breast-conserving treatment: end of the beginning. Breast 16:441–442PubMedCrossRef Zgajnar J (2007) Digital evaluation of breast cosmesis after breast-conserving treatment: end of the beginning. Breast 16:441–442PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Is face-only photographic view enough for the aesthetic evaluation of breast cancer conservative treatment?
Authors
Maria João Cardoso
André Magalhães
Teresa Almeida
Susy Costa
Conny Vrieling
David Christie
Jørgen Johansen
Jaime S. Cardoso
Publication date
01-12-2008
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 3/2008
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-008-9896-5

Other articles of this Issue 3/2008

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 3/2008 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine