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
Managing therapeutic resistance in breast cancer: from the lncRNAs perspective
TL;DR: The role and underlying mechanisms of lnc RNAs in regulating BC treatment resistance with an emphasis on lncRNAs-mediated resistance in different clinical scenarios are highlighted, and the potential of lNCRNAs as novel biomarkers or therapeutic targets to improve BC therapy response is discussed.
Journal ArticleDOI
Impact on the recall rate of digital breast tomosynthesis as an adjunct to digital mammography in the screening setting. A double reading experience and review of the literature
Luca A. Carbonaro,Giovanni Di Leo,Paola Clauser,Paola Clauser,Rubina M. Trimboli,Nicola Verardi,Maria Paola Fedeli,Rossano Girometti,Alfredo Tafà,Paola Bruscoli,Gianni Saguatti,Massimo Bazzocchi,Francesco Sardanelli +12 more
TL;DR: DBT was confirmed to reduce RR, as shown by 13 of 15 previous studies (reported reduction 6-82%, median 31%).
Journal ArticleDOI
Imaging Features of Nonmalignant and Malignant Architectural Distortion Detected by Tomosynthesis.
TL;DR: Three-dimensional imaging features of AD can help to distinguish nonmalignant types in which symmetric or spoke-wheel spiculation with central lucency are more often seen and are more Often occult on ultrasound.
Journal ArticleDOI
Pathologic Upgrade Rates of High-Risk Breast Lesions on Digital Two-Dimensional vs Tomosynthesis Mammography
TL;DR: There is no difference in the upgrade rates of high-risk breast lesions on DM vs DBT, but the proportion of HRL upgrades that are invasive rather than in situ carcinoma is higher with DBT.
Journal ArticleDOI
2D mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, and ultrasound: which should be used for the different breast densities in breast cancer screening?
Anna Starikov,Michele Drotman,Keith Hentel,Janine Katzen,Robert J. Min,Elizabeth Kagan Arleo +5 more
TL;DR: Cancer detection is increased by adding WBS to 2D and women with dense and nondense breasts benefit from reduced recall rate with the addition of DBT; however, this benefit is negated with the additions of WBS.
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.