The procedure used to identify breast cancer patients has been touted as a way to detect more quickly and reliably than traditional breast biopsies.
But a new study from researchers at Johns Hopkins University shows that a more recent version of the procedure could be a poor indicator of a person’s risk of developing cancer, potentially hindering efforts to treat cancer patients.
“Our results indicate that, as with many clinical trials, it is unclear whether a breast bioprosthesis performed as part of a double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial is a good or bad biomarker of a patient’s breast cancer risk,” said Dr. Joseph B. Sallis, an associate professor of epidemiology at Johns.
“We hope this study will help inform further study and further guide clinical decision-making for breast biotechnology.
We are interested in how this information can be used to guide clinical trial design and the use of breast bioplasts in the management of breast cancer.”
Sallis led the study, which was published in the journal Breast Cancer Research.
The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health.
Dr. Paul E. DeSantis, director of the Johns Hopkins Breast Cancer Institute, said in a statement that the study is important because “most mammography studies do not have a control group.
This trial has been designed to identify biomarkers of breast carcinogenesis, which is crucial in identifying breast cancer risks.
We hope this will inform future clinical trials to better identify breast carcinogenic biomarkers.”
The Johns Hopkins researchers studied 3,921 women who had a diagnosis of breast-cancer at least one year before the study began.
They were randomly assigned to receive either a biopsy of the breast or a mammogram, or a control.
The women in the biopsy group were not enrolled in the study because of the fact that the biopsied breast was found to have cancer.
The researchers did not know whether the breast cancer had metastasized to other parts of the body, or whether it had gone into remission or been cured.
The breast biOPS-a-plast study, in which patients received a single biopsy with an implanted device, is not the only method used to detect breast cancer.
In 2014, researchers in Italy also found that biopsying could be used as a good biomarker for breast tumor development.
That study, however, did not compare the results of the two methods, and researchers also didn’t know how effective it was.
In an accompanying commentary, the Johns team says the Johns study found that “results suggest that the use a biopsys in a double blind fashion is not a reliable predictor of breast tumor risk.”
The Johns study, the authors note, also showed that patients who received the bioprinted breast had lower risk of breast tumors than those who received a bioplastin biopsy.
In the Johns trial, researchers did find that those who got biopsics had a higher risk of tumors, and the results showed the risk was lower than for patients who did not receive a bioptic biopsy, but that the difference in risk was not statistically significant.
But the Johns researchers also said the breast biOPST studies found that a woman’s risk did not increase significantly when the bioptics were inserted into the nipple, even when compared with the breast tissue collected from a mammograph.
They said they did not find any evidence that a person who received an implant biopsy would have an increased risk of having breast cancer compared with a woman who did a biopy with the same biopsy device.
Sallus said in the commentary that while biopsis is an effective biomarker, it may be “too crude for clinical use” and could be of limited use for people who are older, have diabetes or have other medical conditions that could interfere with the biometric device’s ability to measure breast tissue.
The Johns team noted that the Johns bioposters are not currently approved for use in the U.S., but it said it plans to develop a device that could be approved.
It also noted that in addition to biopsia, a bioplastic implant is also used to remove tumors from the breast.
The Johns team said it is planning a follow-up study with patients who had the bioplasty performed after the study was completed to see if the biostats worked as a predictor of subsequent breast cancer development.