Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Edward A. Sickles is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Edward A. Sickles.


Journal of The American College of Radiology | 2010

Breast Cancer Screening With Imaging: Recommendations From the Society of Breast Imaging and the ACR on the Use of Mammography, Breast MRI, Breast Ultrasound, and Other Technologies for the Detection of Clinically Occult Breast Cancer

Carol H. Lee; D. David Dershaw; Daniel B. Kopans; Phil Evans; Barbara Monsees; Debra L. Monticciolo; R. James Brenner; Lawrence W. Bassett; Wendie A. Berg; Stephen A. Feig; Edward Hendrick; Ellen B. Mendelson; Carl J. D'Orsi; Edward A. Sickles; Linda J. Warren Burhenne

Screening for breast cancer with mammography has been shown to decrease mortality from breast cancer, and mammography is the mainstay of screening for clinically occult disease. Mammography, however, has well-recognized limitations, and recently, other imaging including ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging have been used as adjunctive screening tools, mainly for women who may be at increased risk for the development of breast cancer. The Society of Breast Imaging and the Breast Imaging Commission of the ACR are issuing these recommendations to provide guidance to patients and clinicians on the use of imaging to screen for breast cancer. Wherever possible, the recommendations are based on available evidence. Where evidence is lacking, the recommendations are based on consensus opinions of the fellows and executive committee of the Society of Breast Imaging and the members of the Breast Imaging Commission of the ACR.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 1999

Utility of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Management of Breast Cancer: Evidence for Improved Preoperative Staging

Laura Esserman; Nola M. Hylton; Leila Yassa; John Barclay; Steven D. Frankel; Edward A. Sickles

PURPOSE The staging and treatment for breast cancer are changing; there is an increase in the incidence of ductal carcinoma-in-situ, the use of fine-needle aspiration and stereotactic biopsy for diagnosis, and the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Thus, there is a need for a tool to assess more precisely the extent of cancer in the breast before surgery. To better plan surgical and chemotherapeutic interventions, we evaluated high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as such a tool. PATIENTS AND METHODS Fifty-seven patients with 58 cases of breast cancer were evaluated preoperatively with MRI using a technique called the triple-acquisition rapid gradient echo technique to maximize anatomic detail. Imaging results were compared with mammography and subsequent pathology results. RESULTS Magnetic resonance imaging correctly identified residual or primary cancer in 55 of 58 cases and accurately predicted the extent of the cancer in 54 of 58 cases. The anatomic extent was more accurately defined with MRI compared with mammography (98% v 55%). Magnetic resonance imaging added the greatest value in cases of multifocal disease. CONCLUSION By applying MRI selectively to patients with a known diagnosis of cancer and focusing on defining the extent of malignant lesions, we were able to obtain clear and accurate anatomic information. Our results suggest that MRI could provide very valuable information for preoperative planning and single-stage resection in breast cancer. Based on preliminary data from our series, MRI would be valuable as a staging tool in the preoperative setting even if the cost is in the range of


Annals of Internal Medicine | 2011

Comparative Effectiveness of Digital Versus Film-Screen Mammography in Community Practice in the United States: A Cohort Study

Karla Kerlikowske; Rebecca A. Hubbard; Diana L. Miglioretti; Berta M. Geller; Bonnie C. Yankaskas; Constance D. Lehman; Stephen H. Taplin; Edward A. Sickles

1,300 to


Journal of The American College of Radiology | 2009

The ACR BI-RADS® Experience: Learning From History

Elizabeth S. Burnside; Edward A. Sickles; Lawrence W. Bassett; Daniel L. Rubin; Carol H. Lee; Debra M. Ikeda; Ellen B. Mendelson; Pamela A. Wilcox; Priscilla F. Butler; Carl J. D'Orsi

2,000. It is already significantly less than the target cost, so it is reasonable to refine this technique for clinical use to help plan the most appropriate surgical intervention and possibly reduce costs as well. A careful prospective study is warranted to validate our findings.


Investigative Radiology | 1987

Digital mammography: ROC studies of the effects of pixel size and unsharp-mask filtering on the detection of subtle microcalcifications

Heang Ping Chan; Carl J. Vyborny; Heber MacMahon; Charles E. Metz; Kunio Doi; Edward A. Sickles

BACKGROUND Few studies have examined the comparative effectiveness of digital versus film-screen mammography in U.S. community practice. OBJECTIVE To determine whether the interpretive performance of digital and film-screen mammography differs. DESIGN Prospective cohort study. SETTING Mammography facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. PARTICIPANTS 329,261 women aged 40 to 79 years underwent 869 286 mammograms (231 034 digital; 638 252 film-screen). MEASUREMENTS Invasive cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosed within 12 months of a digital or film-screen examination and calculation of mammography sensitivity, specificity, cancer detection rates, and tumor outcomes. RESULTS Overall, cancer detection rates and tumor characteristics were similar for digital and film-screen mammography, but the sensitivity and specificity of each modality varied by age, tumor characteristics, breast density, and menopausal status. Compared with film-screen mammography, the sensitivity of digital mammography was significantly higher for women aged 60 to 69 years (89.9% vs. 83.0%; P = 0.014) and those with estrogen receptor-negative cancer (78.5% vs. 65.8%; P = 0.016); borderline significantly higher for women aged 40 to 49 years (82.4% vs. 75.6%; P = 0.071), those with extremely dense breasts (83.6% vs. 68.1%; P = 0.051), and pre- or perimenopausal women (87.1% vs. 81.7%; P = 0.057); and borderline significantly lower for women aged 50 to 59 years (80.5% vs. 85.1%; P = 0.097). The specificity of digital and film-screen mammography was similar by decade of age, except for women aged 40 to 49 years (88.0% vs. 89.7%; P < 0.001). LIMITATION Statistical power for subgroup analyses was limited. CONCLUSION Overall, cancer detection with digital or film-screen mammography is similar in U.S. women aged 50 to 79 years undergoing screening mammography. Women aged 40 to 49 years are more likely to have extremely dense breasts and estrogen receptor-negative tumors; if they are offered mammography screening, they may choose to undergo digital mammography to optimize cancer detection. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE National Cancer Institute.


Annals of Internal Medicine | 1973

Pneumonia in acute leukemia.

Edward A. Sickles; Viola Mae Young; William H. Greene; Peter H. Wiernik

The Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) initiative, instituted by the ACR, was begun in the late 1980s to address a lack of standardization and uniformity in mammography practice reporting. An important component of the BI-RADS initiative is the lexicon, a dictionary of descriptors of specific imaging features. The BI-RADS lexicon has always been data driven, using descriptors that previously had been shown in the literature to be predictive of benign and malignant disease. Once established, the BI-RADS lexicon provided new opportunities for quality assurance, communication, research, and improved patient care. The history of this lexicon illustrates a series of challenges and instructive successes that provide a valuable guide for other groups that aspire to develop similar lexicons in the future.


Cancer | 1996

Racial differences in timeliness of follow-up after abnormal screening mammography

Sophia W. Chang; Karla Kerlikowske; Anna M. Nápoles-Springer; Samuel F. Posner; Edward A. Sickles; Eliseo J. Pérez-Stable

We investigated the spatial resolution requirement and the effect of unsharp-mask filtering on the detectability of subtle microcalcifications in digital mammography. Digital images were obtained by digitizing conventional screen-film mammograms with a 0.1 X 0.1 mm2 pixel size, processed with unsharp masking, and then reconstituted on film with a Fuji image processing/simulation system (Fuji Photo Film Co., Tokyo, Japan). Twenty normal cases and 12 cases with subtle microcalcifications were included. Observer performance experiments were conducted to assess the detectability of subtle microcalcifications in the conventional, the unprocessed digital, and the unsharp-masked mammograms. The observer response data were evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and LROC (ROC with localization) analyses. Our results indicate that digital mammograms obtained with 0.1 X 0.1 mm2 pixels provide lower detectability than the conventional screen-film mammograms. The detectability of microcalcifications in the digital mammograms is improved by unsharp-mask filtering; the processed mammograms still provide lower accuracy than the conventional mammograms, however, chiefly because of increased false-positive detection rates for the processed images at each subjective confidence level. Viewing unprocessed digital and unsharp-masked images in pairs resulted in approximately the same detectability as that obtained with the unsharp-masked images alone. However, this result may be influenced by the fact that the same limited viewing time was necessarily divided between the two images.


JAMA | 2011

Accuracy and Outcomes of Screening Mammography in Women With a Personal History of Early-Stage Breast Cancer

Nehmat Houssami; Linn Abraham; Diana L. Miglioretti; Edward A. Sickles; Karla Kerlikowske; Diana S. M. Buist; Berta M. Geller; Hyman B. Muss; Les Irwig

Abstract Pneumonia is a quite frequent and often fatal complication in patients with acute leukemia. During a 19-month period 52 episodes of pneumonia were found among 68 leukemia patients. Except ...


Journal of the National Cancer Institute | 2008

Mammography Facility Characteristics Associated With Interpretive Accuracy of Screening Mammography

Stephen H. Taplin; Linn Abraham; William E. Barlow; Joshua J. Fenton; Eric A. Berns; Patricia A. Carney; Gary Cutter; Edward A. Sickles; D'Orsi Carl; Joann G. Elmore

To determine whether patient race was associated with timeliness of follow‐up after abnormal screening mammography, a retrospective record review of diagnostic tests for women with abnormal screening mammography from a Northern California mobile van program was conducted.


Radiology | 2009

Positive Predictive Value of Specific Mammographic Findings according to Reader and Patient Variables

Aruna Venkatesan; Philip W. Chu; Karla Kerlikowske; Edward A. Sickles; Rebecca Smith-Bindman

CONTEXT Women with a personal history of breast cancer (PHBC) are at risk of developing another breast cancer and are recommended for screening mammography. Few high-quality data exist on screening performance in PHBC women. OBJECTIVE To examine the accuracy and outcomes of mammography screening in PHBC women relative to screening of similar women without PHBC. DESIGN AND SETTING Cohort of PHBC women, mammogram matched to non-PHBC women, screened through facilities (1996-2007) affiliated with the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. PARTICIPANTS There were 58,870 screening mammograms in 19,078 women with a history of early-stage (in situ or stage I-II invasive) breast cancer and 58,870 matched (breast density, age group, mammography year, and registry) screening mammograms in 55,315 non-PHBC women. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Mammography accuracy based on final assessment, cancer detection rate, interval cancer rate, and stage at diagnosis. RESULTS Within 1 year after screening, 655 cancers were observed in PHBC women (499 invasive, 156 in situ) and 342 cancers (285 invasive, 57 in situ) in non-PHBC women. Screening accuracy and outcomes in PHBC relative to non-PHBC women were cancer rates of 10.5 per 1000 screens (95% CI, 9.7-11.3) vs 5.8 per 1000 screens (95% CI, 5.2-6.4), cancer detection rate of 6.8 per 1000 screens (95% CI, 6.2-7.5) vs 4.4 per 1000 screens (95% CI, 3.9-5.0), interval cancer rate of 3.6 per 1000 screens (95% CI, 3.2-4.1) vs 1.4 per 1000 screens (95% CI, 1.1-1.7), sensitivity 65.4% (95% CI, 61.5%-69.0%) vs 76.5% (95% CI, 71.7%-80.7%), specificity 98.3% (95% CI, 98.2%-98.4%) vs 99.0% (95% CI, 98.9%-99.1%), abnormal mammogram results in 2.3% (95% CI, 2.2%-2.5%) vs 1.4% (95% CI, 1.3%-1.5%) (all comparisons P < .001). Screening sensitivity in PHBC women was higher for detection of in situ cancer (78.7%; 95% CI, 71.4%-84.5%) than invasive cancer (61.1%; 95% CI, 56.6%-65.4%), P < .001; lower in the initial 5 years (60.2%; 95% CI, 54.7%-65.5%) than after 5 years from first cancer (70.8%; 95% CI, 65.4%-75.6%), P = .006; and was similar for detection of ipsilateral cancer (66.3%; 95% CI, 60.3%-71.8%) and contralateral cancer (66.1%; 95% CI, 60.9%-70.9%), P = .96. Screen-detected and interval cancers in women with and without PHBC were predominantly early stage. CONCLUSION Mammography screening in PHBC women detects early-stage second breast cancers but has lower sensitivity and higher interval cancer rate, despite more evaluation and higher underlying cancer rate, relative to that in non-PHBC women.

Collaboration


Dive into the Edward A. Sickles's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Bonnie C. Yankaskas

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Barbara Monsees

Washington University in St. Louis

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge