Digital Mammography versus Digital Mammography Plus Tomosynthesis in Breast Cancer Screening: The Oslo Tomosynthesis Screening Trial.

Radiology

From the Division of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, University of Oslo, Breast Imaging Center, PO Box 4950, Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway (P.S., R.G.); Departments of Biostatistics (A.I.B.) and Radiology (D.G.), University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pa; Retired, former employee of Hologic (L.T.N.); Department of Screening, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway (S.S., S.H.); Department of Diagnostic Physics, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway (B.H.Ø.); and Department of Health Sciences, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway (S.H.).

Published: April 2019

Background Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is replacing digital mammography (DM) in the clinical workflow. Currently, there are limited prospective studies comparing the diagnostic accuracy of both examinations and the role of synthetic mammography (SM) and computer-aided detection (CAD). Purpose To compare the accuracy of DM versus DM + DBT in population-based breast cancer screening. Materials and Methods This prospective study, performed from November 2010 to December 2012, included 24 301 women (mean age, 59.1 years ± 5.7 [standard deviation]) with 281 cancers, of which 51 were interval cancers. Each examination was independently interpreted with four reading modes: DM, DM + CAD, DM + DBT, and SM + DBT. Sensitivity and specificity were compared for DM versus DM + DBT, DM versus DM + CAD, DM + DBT versus SM + DBT, and DM versus DM + DBT at double reading. Reader-adjusted performance characteristics of reading modes were evaluated on the basis of pre-arbitration (initial interpretation) scores. Statistical analysis was based on cluster bootstrap analysis using 10 000 random resamples. Results Sensitivity was 54.1% (152 of 281) for DM and 70.5% (198 of 281) for DM + DBT. Reader-adjusted difference was 12.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.2%, 19.7%; P = .001). Specificity was 94.2% (false-positive fraction [FPF], 5.8%; 1388 of 24 020) for DM and 95.0% (FPF, 5.0%; 1209/24 020) for DM + DBT, with a reader-adjusted difference in FPF of -1.2% (95% CI: -1.7%, -0.7%; P < .001). Sensitivity was 69.0% (194 of 281) for SM + DBT and 70.5% (198 of 281) for DM + DBT, with a reader-adjusted difference of 1.0% (95% CI: -6.2%, 8.5%; P = .77). Specificity was 95.4% (FPF, 4.6%; 1111 of 24 020) for SM + DBT and 95.0% (FPF, 5.0%;1209 of 24 020) for DM + DBT, with reader-adjusted 95% CIs for FPF of 4.7%, 5.4% and 5.0%, 5.7%, respectively, and a difference of -0.3% (95% CI: -0.8%, 0.2%; P = .23). Differences in sensitivity and specificity with the addition of CAD were small and not significant (P > .2). Conclusion Addition of digital breast tomosynthesis to digital mammography resulted in significant gains in sensitivity and specificity. Synthetic mammography in combination with digital breast tomosynthesis had similar sensitivity and specificity to digital mammography in combination with digital breast tomosynthesis. © RSNA, 2019 See also the editorial by Lång in this issue.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019182394DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

digital mammography
20
digital breast
16
breast tomosynthesis
16
versus dbt
16
sensitivity specificity
16
dbt reader-adjusted
16
dbt
14
dbt versus
12
281 dbt
12
reader-adjusted difference
12

Similar Publications

Breast cancer is one of the most aggressive types of cancer, and its early diagnosis is crucial for reducing mortality rates and ensuring timely treatment. Computer-aided diagnosis systems provide automated mammography image processing, interpretation, and grading. However, since the currently existing methods suffer from such issues as overfitting, lack of adaptability, and dependence on massive annotated datasets, the present work introduces a hybrid approach to enhance breast cancer classification accuracy.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Myofibroblastoma is a rare mesenchymal tumour known for its benign nature but complex diagnostic pathway. A woman in her 40s presented with a painless breast mass, initially reported as a fibroadenoma on ultrasound mammography and as a benign to borderline phyllodes tumour on fine needle aspiration cytology. Contrast-enhanced CT was reported as carcinoma of the breast with Breast Imaging and Reporting Data System (BIRADS)-6.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

[The role of mammography in prevention of cardiovascular risk in women].

Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol

January 2025

Université PARIS EST, France; Unité INSERM U955 n°18, AP-HP, Hôpital Henri Mondor, France; Service d'imagerie médicale, Créteil, France. Electronic address:

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background/objectives: Breast cancer is a significant global health concern, and early detection is crucial for improving patient outcomes. Mammography is widely used but has limitations, particularly for younger women with denser breasts. These include reduced sensitivity, false positives, and radiation risks.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

: Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), previously known as the most common chronic liver disease, is soon to be the leading indication for liver transplantation; however, the diagnosis may remain occult for decades. There is a need for biomarkers that identify patients at risk for MASLD and patients at risk for disease progression to optimize patient management and outcomes. Lymph node adiposity (LNA) is a novel marker of adiposity identified within axillary lymph nodes on screening mammography.

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!