Purpose: To retrospectively compare the accuracy of digital versus film mammography in population subgroups of the Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST) defined by combinations of age, menopausal status, and breast density, by using either biopsy results or follow-up information as the reference standard.

Materials And Methods: DMIST included women who underwent both digital and film screening mammography. Institutional review board approval at all participating sites and informed consent from all participating women in compliance with HIPAA was obtained for DMIST and this retrospective analysis. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) for each modality were compared within each subgroup evaluated (age < 50 vs 50-64 vs >or= 65 years, dense vs nondense breasts at mammography, and pre- or perimenopausal vs postmenopausal status for the two younger age cohorts [10 new subgroups in toto]) while controlling for multiple comparisons (P < .002 indicated a significant difference). All DMIST cancers were evaluated with respect to mammographic detection method (digital vs film vs both vs neither), mammographic lesion type (mass, calcifications, or other), digital machine type, mammographic and pathologic size and diagnosis, existence of prior mammographic study at time of interpretation, months since prior mammographic study, and compressed breast thickness.

Results: Thirty-three centers enrolled 49 528 women. Breast cancer status was determined for 42,760 women, the group included in this study. Pre- or perimenopausal women younger than 50 years who had dense breasts at film mammography comprised the only subgroup for which digital mammography was significantly better than film (AUCs, 0.79 vs 0.54; P = .0015). Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System-based sensitivity in this subgroup was 0.59 for digital and 0.27 for film mammography. AUCs were not significantly different in any of the other subgroups. For women aged 65 years or older with fatty breasts, the AUC showed a nonsignificant tendency toward film being better than digital mammography (AUCs, 0.88 vs 0.70; P = .0025).

Conclusion: Digital mammography performed significantly better than film for pre- and perimenopausal women younger than 50 years with dense breasts, but film tended nonsignificantly to perform better for women aged 65 years or older with fatty breasts.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2659550PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2461070200DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

film mammography
16
years dense
12
pre- perimenopausal
12
digital mammography
12
digital
10
film
10
mammography
9
accuracy digital
8
digital versus
8
versus film
8

Similar Publications

Purpose: Breast cancer remains one of the most prevalent cancers globally, necessitating effective early screening and diagnosis. This study investigates the effectiveness and generalizability of our recently proposed data augmentation technique, attention-guided erasing (AGE), across various transfer learning classification tasks for breast abnormality classification in mammography.

Methods: AGE utilizes attention head visualizations from DINO self-supervised pretraining to weakly localize regions of interest (ROI) in images.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Objectives: To assess the impact of the transition from film to digital mammography in the Australian national breast cancer screening program.

Study Design: Retrospective linked population health data analysis (New South Wales Central Cancer Registry, BreastScreen NSW); interrupted time series analysis.

Setting: New South Wales, 2002-2016.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Diversity, inclusivity and traceability of mammography datasets used in development of Artificial Intelligence technologies: a systematic review.

Clin Imaging

February 2025

University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK; Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK; National Institute for Health and Care Research Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK; Birmingham Health Partners Centre for Regulatory Science and Innovation, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK. Electronic address:

Article Synopsis
  • This review analyzes various mammography datasets used for AI development in breast cancer screening, focusing on their transparency, content, and accessibility.
  • A search identified 254 datasets, with only 28 being accessible; most datasets came from Europe, East Asia, and North America, raising concerns over poor demographic representation.
  • The findings highlight significant gaps in diversity within these datasets, underscoring the need for better documentation and inclusivity to enhance the effectiveness of AI technologies in breast cancer research.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Purpose: Breast density assessment is an essential component of risk-stratified and supplemental breast cancer screenings for the future generation. International collaborative research and cooperation are required to determine global trends and differences in mammographic breast density. Due to the cost and energy associated with the use of film or digital mammograms, international breast density assessment studies tend to be challenging.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

The objective of this investigation was to improve the diagnosis of breast cancer by combining two significant datasets: the Wisconsin Breast Cancer Database and the DDSM Curated Breast Imaging Subset (CBIS-DDSM). The Wisconsin Breast Cancer Database provides a detailed examination of the characteristics of cell nuclei, including radius, texture, and concavity, for 569 patients, of which 212 had malignant tumors. In addition, the CBIS-DDSM dataset-a revised variant of the Digital Database for Screening Mammography (DDSM)-offers a standardized collection of 2,620 scanned film mammography studies, including cases that are normal, benign, or malignant and that include verified pathology data.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!