Doctors have a special understanding of breast cancer and its prognosis, which means they can treat it with the right medicine at the right time.

They’re not so good at diagnosing the disease itself, however.

A lot of the research in the area of breast cancers is about how to identify the bad cancer and how to treat it, which has resulted in a lot of new drugs, new techniques and better ways of thinking about breast cancer.

But how do you identify the cancer and treat it?

This is where the evidence base comes in.

It’s a difficult problem to solve, but it’s one that’s important to tackling.

The good news is there’s a big amount of new research into the topic, and it’s all being conducted at universities around the world.

The first of these studies was conducted in Canada, where researchers followed over 1,000 women for four years, from their first mammogram to their last, and identified the breast cancer they’d seen on the ultrasound.

They then compared their results to those of a control group of women who had not been diagnosed with breast cancer, and who were also followed for five years.

“It’s important not to think of breast tumors as bad when they are, in fact, very treatable,” says senior study author Dr. Michael Dufault, a professor of medicine at McGill University.

“They’re very important to our health and their outcomes are important for our health.”

Dufault and his team identified a cluster of breast tumours in the second wave of patients, and a cluster in the third wave.

They also identified a new class of tumours called metastatic breast cancer that was more common in the first wave.

This suggests that the first group of patients may have had more aggressive metastatic disease and the second group had a more mild form of breast disease.

It also suggests that it was the combination of these two types of cancer that led to a higher rate of breast death.

“What we have found is that we have the best outcomes in patients who have been diagnosed and treated with the new drugs that we’ve developed,” says Dufaults study author Karen Hochman, a physician at McGill’s department of radiology and head of the Centre for the Epidemiology and Genetics of Breast Cancer.

When these women were followed for 10 years, the incidence of breast and ovarian cancers dropped significantly, from 5.4 to 0.4 per 1,100 women per year.

The incidence of pancreatic and colorectal cancers also dropped dramatically, from 10.5 to 1.5 per 1% per year, and the rate of lung cancer decreased from 12.4% to 1%.

“It is really encouraging that we see this very small effect of a drug we have been using for a number of years on the rate,” says Hochmann.

Another study published in The Lancet found that in patients treated with a combination of chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgery for breast cancer with metastatic cancer, a reduction in breast cancer death was significantly higher in the early phase of treatment.

In fact, patients who received surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy were significantly more likely to survive and go on to live five years longer than those who received chemotherapy alone.

This finding was also significant for women with a metastatic diagnosis, suggesting that surgery can be a really good choice for those women.

“We know that in cancer, chemotherapy is probably the best treatment for cancer, but we’re really learning about the role of radiation and surgery in cancer,” says Professor Bruce Harrop, a co-author of the study and a professor at the University of Sydney.

“It really opens up a whole new world of research.”

Hochman and Dufalt are now working on a follow-up study to try and identify the patients with metastasis and other cancers that might have improved their survival in the post-surgery period.

That study will likely include more invasive techniques like MRI scans and CT scans, and will look at how the different types of radiation affect the cancer.

“I think it’s a great example of the kinds of studies that we’re doing that have the potential to improve the quality of life for patients with breast cancers,” says Harrop.

There are also a lot more people working on the genetics of breast diseases.

That’s a bit of a big topic in the field, but in the last few years researchers have found genetic markers that indicate the likelihood that a woman has breast cancer or other breast cancer-related disease.

So, even if your cancer is benign, you can be screened for it, and you can have a more precise and precise picture of the type of cancer you’re dealing with.

If you want to know more about the genetics behind breast cancer diagnosis, you might want to check out these articles: How the world is getting sicker: Cancer is everywhere, and its symptoms are increasingly being diagnosed  and