Breast Cancer Screening Using Tomosynthesis in Combination With Digital Mammography
Sarah M. Friedewald,Elizabeth A. Rafferty,Stephen L. Rose,Melissa A. Durand,Donna Plecha,Julianne S. Greenberg,Mary Katherine Hayes,Debra S. Copit,Kara L. Carlson,Thomas M. Cink,Lora D. Barke,Linda N. Greer,Dave P. Miller,Emily F. Conant +13 more
TLDR
Addition of tomosynthesis to digital mammography was associated with a decrease in recall rate and an increase in cancer detection rate, and further studies are needed to assess the relationship to clinical outcomes.Abstract:
mammography + tomosynthesis; difference, 1.3 (95% CI, 0.4-2.1; P = .004); for cancer detection, 4.2 (95% CI, 3.8-4.7) with digital mammography vs 5.4 (95% CI, 4.9-6.0) with digital mammography + tomosynthesis; difference, 1.2 (95% CI, 0.8-1.6; P < .001); and for invasive cancer detection, 2.9 (95% CI, 2.5-3.2) with digital mammography vs 4.1 (95% CI, 3.7-4.5) with digital mammography + tomosynthesis; difference, 1.2 (95% CI, 0.8-1.6; P < .001). The in situ cancer detection rate was 1.4 (95% CI, 1.2-1.6) per 1000 screens with both methods. Adding tomosynthesis was associated with an increase in the positive predictive value for recall from 4.3% to 6.4% (difference, 2.1%; 95% CI, 1.7%-2.5%; P < .001) and for biopsy from 24.2% to 29.2% (difference, 5.0%; 95% CI, 3.0%-7.0%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Addition of tomosynthesis to digital mammography was associated with a decrease in recall rate and an increase in cancer detection rate. Further studies are needed to assess the relationship to clinical outcomes.read more
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Investigation of the imaging quality of synchrotron-based phase-contrast mammographic tomography
Timur E. Gureyev,Timur E. Gureyev,Sheridan C Mayo,Yakov Nesterets,Yakov Nesterets,Sara Mohammadi,Sara Mohammadi,Darren Lockie,Ralph H Menk,Fulvia Arfelli,Konstantin Mikhailovitch Pavlov,Konstantin Mikhailovitch Pavlov,Marcus J. Kitchen,Fabrizio Zanconati,Christian Dullin,Giuliana Tromba +15 more
TL;DR: In this article, a systematic study of phase-contrast x-ray computed tomography in the propagation-based and analyser-based modes using specially designed phantoms and excised breast tissue samples is presented.
Journal ArticleDOI
Screening for dense breasts: digital breast tomosynthesis.
TL;DR: The benefits and limitations of DBT as a screening alternative for women with dense breasts are discussed, with the ability to reduce breast tissue overlap, thus potentially revealing lesions that would otherwise have been missed.
Journal ArticleDOI
Strengths and Weaknesses of Synthetic Mammography in Screening.
TL;DR: SM's strengths include a reduced radiation dose, shorter acquisition time compared with a combined FFDM/DBT screening examination (with potentially less motion artifact), and increased conspicuity of calcifications, spiculated margins, and architectural distortion.
Journal ArticleDOI
Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Practice Patterns Following 2011 FDA Approval: A Survey of Breast Imaging Radiologists.
TL;DR: DBT is being adopted worldwide across all practice types, yet variations in examination indication, patient selection, utilization of s2D images, and access to DBT-guided procedures persist, highlighting the need for consensus and standardization.
Journal ArticleDOI
Stand-alone Artificial Intelligence - The Future of Breast Cancer Screening?
TL;DR: There is a need to perform additional studies, especially prospective ones, with large screening data sets, to both gauge the actual stand-alone performance of these new algorithms, and the impact of the different implementation possibilities on screening programs.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
American Cancer Society Guidelines for Breast Screening with MRI as an Adjunct to Mammography
Debbie Saslow,Carla Boetes,Wylie Burke,Steven E. Harms,Martin O. Leach,Constance D. Lehman,Elizabeth A. Morris,Etta D. Pisano,Mitchell D. Schnall,Stephen F. Sener,Robert A. Smith,Ellen Warner,Martin J. Yaffe,Kimberly S. Andrews,Christy A. Russell +14 more
TL;DR: There are several risk subgroups for which the available data are insufficient to recommend for or against screening, including women with a personal history of breast cancer, carcinoma in situ, atypical hyperplasia, and extremely dense breasts on mammography.
Journal ArticleDOI
Screening for Lung Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement
TL;DR: Although lung cancer screening is not an alternative to smoking cessation, the USPSTF found adequate evidence that annual screening for lung cancer with LDCT in a defined population of high-risk persons can prevent a substantial number of lung cancerrelated deaths.
Journal ArticleDOI
Diagnostic Performance of Digital versus Film Mammography for Breast-Cancer Screening
Etta D. Pisano,Constantine Gatsonis,Edward Hendrick,Martin J. Yaffe,Janet K. Baum,Suddhasatta Acharyya,Emily F. Conant,Laurie L. Fajardo,Lawrence W. Bassett,Roberta A. Jong,Murray Rebner +10 more
TL;DR: The overall diagnostic accuracy of digital and film mammography as a means of screening for breast cancer is similar, but digital mammography is more accurate in women under the age of 50 years, women with radiographically dense breasts, and premenopausal or perimenopausal women.
Journal ArticleDOI
Screening for Breast Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement
Ned Calonge,Diana B. Petitti,Thomas G. DeWitt,Allen J. Dietrich,Kimberly D. Gregory,David C. Grossman,George Isham,Michael L. LeFevre,Rosanne M. Leipzig,Lucy N. Marion,Bernadette Mazurek Melnyk,Virginia A. Moyer,Judith K. Ockene,George F. Sawaya,J. Sanford Schwartz,Timothy J Wilt,US Preventive Serv Task Force +16 more
TL;DR: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess additional benefits and harms of either digital mammography or magnetic resonance imaging instead of film mammography as screening modalities for breast cancer.
Journal ArticleDOI
Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer.
Wendie A. Berg,Jeffrey D. Blume,Jean B. Cormack,Ellen B. Mendelson,Daniel Lehrer,M. Böhm-Vélez,Etta D. Pisano,Roberta A. Jong,W. Phil Evans,Marilyn J. Morton,Mary C. Mahoney,Linda Hovanessian Larsen,Richard G. Barr,Dione M. Farria,Helga S. Marques,Karan Boparai +15 more
TL;DR: The diagnostic yield, sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy (assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) of combined mammography plus ultrasound vs mammography alone and the positive predictive value of biopsy recommendations for mammographyplus ultrasound vs Mammography alone are compared.