RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is higher after a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) compared to direct screening colonoscopy. OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis evaluated how ADR, the rates of advanced adenoma detection (AADR), colorectal cancer detection (CDR), and sessile serrated lesion detection (SSLDR) are affected by different FIT positivity thresholds. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and EBM Reviews databases for studies reporting ADR, AADR, CDR, and SSLDR according to different FIT cut-off values in asymptomatic average-risk individuals aged 50-74 years old. Data were stratified according to sex, age, time to colonoscopy, publication year, continent, and FIT kit type. Study quality, heterogeneity, and publication bias were assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 4280 articles were retrieved and fifty-eight studies were included (277,661 FIT-positive colonoscopies; mean cecal intubation 96.3%; mean age 60.8 years; male 52.1%). Mean ADR was 56.1% (95% CI 53.4 - 58.7%), while mean AADR, CDR, and SSLDR were 27.2% (95% CI 24.4 - 30.1%), 5.3% (95% CI 4.7 - 6.0%), and 3.0% (95% CI 1.7 - 4.6%), respectively. For each 20 µg Hb/g increase in FIT cut-off level, ADR increased by 1.54% (95% CI 0.52 - 2.56%, p < 0.01), AADR by 3.90% (95% CI 2.76 - 5.05%, p < 0.01) and CDR by 1.46% (95% CI 0.66 - 2.24%, p < 0.01). Many detection rates were greater amongst males and Europeans. CONCLUSIONS: ADRs in FIT-positive colonoscopies are influenced by the adopted FIT positivity threshold, and identified targets, importantly, proved to be higher than most current societal recommendations.
Assuntos
Adenoma , Colonoscopia , Neoplasias Colorretais , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Sangue Oculto , Humanos , Adenoma/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Colorretais/diagnóstico , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Fezes/química , Idoso , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Masculino , Imunoquímica , FemininoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Transrectal (TR) ultrasound guided prostate biopsy and transperineal (TP) ultrasound guided prostate biopsy are the two most commonly used methods to detect prostate cancer, the detection rate of the two biopsy approaches may differ in patients with different clinical characteristics. Here we aimed to compare the prostate cancer detection rate and positive rate of biopsy cores between TR and TP prostate biopsy in patients with different clinical characteristics. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed and compared the clinical data of 452 patients underwent TR or TP prostate biopsy in our hospital from June 2017 to September 2021. And patients were stratified according to several clinical characteristic (serum PSA level, prostate volume, PSA density, T stage and ISUP grade), cancer detection rate and positive rate of biopsy cores were compared in different stratified groups. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in age, PSA level, prostate volume, and PSA density between the TR and TP groups. TR group had a higher overall cancer detection rate and positive rate of biopsy cores than TP group. Further subgroup analysis showed that TR group had a higher cancer detection rate in patients with prostate volumes 30-80 mL, and that the TR group had a higher positive rate of biopsy cores among the patients with T3-T4 stages, while TP group had a higher positive rates of biopsy cores among the patients with T1-T2 stages. There were no significant differences between the TR and TP groups for each subgroup when stratified by PSA level, PSA density and ISUP grade. CONCLUSIONS: TR approach may have advantage in patients with prostate volumes 30-80 mL and T3-T4 stages, while TP approach may have advantage in patients with T1-T2 stages.
Assuntos
Próstata , Neoplasias da Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Próstata/diagnóstico por imagem , Próstata/patologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Antígeno Prostático Específico , Reto , Neoplasias da Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Próstata/patologia , Biópsia/métodos , Biópsia Guiada por Imagem/métodosRESUMO
Objective: To investigate the effect of double reads by a second radiologist on cancer detection rate (CDR), positive predictive value of recommendation for tissue diagnosis (PPV2), and the positive predictive value of biopsy performed (PPV3) for biopsy recommendations in high-risk screening breast MRIs. Methods: The policy of second reads on biopsies recommended for MRIs was prospectively implemented in October 2019. This IRB approved retrospective analysis compared consecutive high-risk screening breast MRI scans performed in a single academic institution between 06/01/2018 to 06/01/2019 (pre-intervention) with screening breast MRI scans performed between 10/31/2019 to 10/31/2020 (post-intervention). Pathology results after biopsy were recorded. Testing of association was performed using the Chi-square test. Results/Discussion: A total of 1124 screening breast MRIs in the pre-intervention and 1672 screening breast MRIs were performed in the post-intervention periods. Biopsies were recommended in 8.6% (97/1124) of pre-intervention and 5.5% (92/1672) of post-intervention MRIs (P = .0012). There was a non-significant increase in PPV2 from pre-intervention 10.3% (10/97) to post-intervention 18.4% (17/92) (P = .109) and in PPV3 from 14% (10/71) to 22.9% (17/74), respectively (P = .17). Similar cancer detection rates, 8.9/1000 (10/1124) and 10.2/1000 (17/1672) (P = .736) were diagnosed in pre-intervention and post-intervention periods, respectively. Conclusion: Double reading of screening breast MRI scans significantly reduced the number of unnecessary biopsies without significant impact in the PPVs or cancer detection rate.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Neoplasias , Humanos , Feminino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Mamografia/métodos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética/métodos , Programas de Rastreamento , Neoplasias da Mama/patologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most prevalent cancer among males. This study attempted to develop a clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) risk nomogram including Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score and other clinical indexes for initial prostate biopsy in light of the different prostate regions, and internal validation was further conducted. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was performed including 688 patients who underwent ultrasound-guided transperineal magnetic resonance imaging fusion prostate biopsy from December 2016 to July 2019. We constructed nomograms combining PI-RADS score and clinical variables (prostate-specific antigen [PSA], prostate volume (PV), age, free/total PSA, and PSA density) through univariate and multivariate logistic regression to identify patients eligible for biopsy. The performance of the predictive model was evaluated by bootstrap resampling. The area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was appointed to quantify the accuracy of the primary nomogram model for csPCa. Calibration curves were used to assess the agreement between the biopsy specimen and the predicted probability of the new nomogram. The χ2 test was also applied to evaluate the heterogeneity between fusion biopsy and systematic biopsy based on different PI-RADS scores and prostate regions. RESULTS: A total of 320 of 688 included patients were diagnosed with csPCa. csPCa was defined as Gleason score ≥7. The ROC and concordance-index both presented good performance. The nomogram reached an AUC of 0.867 for predicting csPCa at the peripheral zone; meanwhile, AUC for transitional and apex zones were 0.889 and 0.757, respectively. Statistical significance was detected between fusion biopsy and systematic biopsy for PI-RADS score >3 lesions and lesions at the peripheral and transitional zones. CONCLUSION: We produced a novel nomogram predicting csPCa in patients with suspected imaging according to different locations. Our results indicated that PI-RADS score combined with other clinical parameters showed a robust predictive capacity for csPCa before prostate biopsy. The new nomogram, which incorporates prebiopsy data including PSA, PV, age, and PI-RADS score, can be helpful for clinical decision-making to avoid unnecessary biopsy.
Assuntos
Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética Multiparamétrica , Neoplasias da Próstata , Humanos , Biópsia Guiada por Imagem/métodos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética/métodos , Masculino , Nomogramas , Antígeno Prostático Específico , Neoplasias da Próstata/patologia , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
PURPOSE: Preoperative breast MRI is used to evaluate for additional cancer and extent of disease for newly diagnosed breast cancer, yet benefits and harms of preoperative MRI are not well-documented. We examined whether preoperative MRI yields additional biopsy and cancer detection by extent of breast density. METHODS: We followed women in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium with an incident breast cancer diagnosed from 2005 to 2017. We quantified breast biopsies and cancers detected within 6 months of diagnosis by preoperative breast MRI receipt, overall and by breast density, accounting for MRI selection bias using inverse probability weighted logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 19,324 women with newly diagnosed breast cancer, 28% had preoperative MRI, 11% additional biopsy, and 5% additional cancer detected. Four times as many women with preoperative MRI underwent additional biopsy compared to women without MRI (22.6% v. 5.1%). Additional biopsy rates with preoperative MRI increased with increasing breast density (27.4% for extremely dense compared to 16.2% for almost entirely fatty breasts). Rates of additional cancer detection were almost four times higher for women with v. without MRI (9.9% v. 2.6%). Conditional on additional biopsy, age-adjusted rates of additional cancer detection were lowest among women with extremely dense breasts, regardless of imaging modality (with MRI: 35.0%; 95% CI 27.0-43.0%; without MRI: 45.1%; 95% CI 32.6-57.5%). CONCLUSION: For women with dense breasts, preoperative MRI was associated with much higher biopsy rates, without concomitant higher cancer detection. Preoperative MRI may be considered for some women, but selecting women based on breast density is not supported by evidence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02980848; registered 2017.
Assuntos
Densidade da Mama , Neoplasias da Mama , Biópsia , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias da Mama/cirurgia , Feminino , Humanos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , MamografiaRESUMO
PURPOSE: The aim of our study was, first, to measure association between radiologists and facilities characteristics and DCIS detection. Second, to assess whether those characteristics affect differently the likelihood of detection of DCIS versus invasive breast cancer. When applicable, we examined whether the identified characteristics were similarly associated with low-grade and high-grade DCIS detection. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 1,750,002 digital screening mammograms (2145 screen-detected DCIS) performed in the Quebec breast cancer screening program between 2007 and 2015 inclusively. The associations between radiologists' and facilities' characteristics and (1) the DCIS detection rate, (2) the invasive detection rate, and (3) the odds of DCIS on invasive detection were assess. For statistically significant associations in the latter analysis, analyses stratified by DCIS grade were performed. Multivariable logistic regression with generalized estimating equations estimates to account for correlation among mammograms was used. RESULTS: Compared to radiologists with recall rate between 5.0 and 9.9%, radiologists with recall rate between 15.0-19.9% and ≥ 20% reached a higher DCIS detection rate, with adjusted detection ratios of, respectively, 1.33 (95% confidence interval = 1.15-1.53) and 1.43 (95% confidence interval = 1.13-1.81). Increase in radiologist' recall rate was statistically significantly associated with an increase in detection of low/intermediate-grade DCIS (P < 0.001), while not in high-grade DCIS (P = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: A major determinant of DCIS detection is the radiologists' recall rate. Abnormalities referred by radiologists with higher recall rates should be identified in order to understand how to decrease recall rate while keeping an optimal DCIS and invasive detection rate.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Carcinoma Intraductal não Infiltrante , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias da Mama/epidemiologia , Carcinoma Intraductal não Infiltrante/diagnóstico por imagem , Carcinoma Intraductal não Infiltrante/epidemiologia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Feminino , Humanos , Mamografia , Programas de Rastreamento , Radiologistas , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Gallbladder polyps are relatively common. Although most gallbladder polyps are benign, some are malignant. Current guidelines state that malignancy should be suspected for polyps ≥ 10 mm in diameter. We clarified the cancer detection rates in accordance with the size distribution of gallbladder polyps, and evaluated the effectiveness of the reported risk factors in predicting malignancy. METHODS: In this retrospective case-control study, our institutional database was searched to identify patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign or malignant gallbladder polyps at Sada Hospital, Japan. The chi-squared test was used to analyze the risk factors for malignancy. RESULTS: There were 227 protruding gallbladder lesions. The 206 benign polyps had a diameter of 2-21 mm, while the 21 malignant polyps were 7-60 mm. The cancer detection rates were 16.4% for lesions ≥ 10 mm, 55.9% for lesions ≥ 15 mm, and 94.1% for lesions ≥ 20 mm. Of the benign lesions, cholesterol polyps were the most frequent (50-100%) in all size ranges, even in large lesions (≥ 15 mm). The sessile lesion morphology was significantly more frequent in malignant (60%) than benign lesions (3.4%, p < 0.00001). Multiple polyps were frequently diagnosed not only as cholesterol polyps (81.1%), but also as adenomas (60%); adenomas were found as a single adenoma within other types of polyps. There were two cases of malignant small gallbladder polyps (< 10 mm); these lesions met the surgical indications of a size increase during observation or a sessile morphology. CONCLUSIONS: The cancer detection rate increased significantly with an increase in the lesion size. Risk factors such as a sessile polyp morphology or an increase in lesion size were effective in predicting malignancy for small gallbladder polyps. It might be difficult to accurately predict the pathologic diagnoses of gallbladder polyps preoperatively, as cholesterol polyps were most frequent, even in the large size range.
Assuntos
Doenças da Vesícula Biliar , Neoplasias da Vesícula Biliar , Pólipos , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Vesícula Biliar/diagnóstico por imagem , Doenças da Vesícula Biliar/diagnóstico por imagem , Doenças da Vesícula Biliar/epidemiologia , Doenças da Vesícula Biliar/cirurgia , Neoplasias da Vesícula Biliar/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Vesícula Biliar/epidemiologia , Neoplasias da Vesícula Biliar/cirurgia , Humanos , Pólipos/cirurgia , Estudos Retrospectivos , UltrassonografiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical benefits of magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion-targeted biopsy for biopsy-naïve Japanese men. METHODS: Between February 2017 and August 2018, 131 biopsy-naïve men who underwent targeted biopsy together with 10-core systematic biopsy at Hiroshima University Hospital were retrospectively investigated. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging findings were reported based on Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2. RESULTS: The overall cancer detection rates per patient were 69.5% in systematic biopsy + targeted biopsy cores, 61.1% in systematic biopsy cores and 61.1% in targeted biopsy cores. The detection rates for clinically significant prostate cancer were 43.5% in targeted biopsy cores and 35.9% in systematic biopsy cores (P = 0.04), whereas the detection rates for clinically insignificant prostate cancer were 17.6% and 25.2% respectively (P = 0.04). Lesions in the peripheral zone were diagnosed more with clinically significant prostate cancer (54.8% vs 20.7%, P < 0.001) and International Society of Urological Pathology grade (3.2 vs 2.7, P = 0.02) than that in the inner gland. Just 4.2% (3/71) of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System category 2 and 3 lesions in the middle or base of the inner gland were found to have clinically significant prostate cancer. The cancer detection rate per core was 42.3% in targeted biopsy cores, whereas it was 17.9% in systematic biopsy cores (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Targeted biopsy is able to improve the diagnostic accuracy of biopsy in detection of clinically significant prostate cancer by reducing the number of clinically insignificant prostate cancer detections compared with 10-core systematic biopsy in biopsy-naïve Japanese men. In addition, the present findings suggest that patients with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System category 2 or 3 lesions at the middle or base of the inner gland might avoid biopsies.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Próstata , Ultrassonografia de Intervenção , Humanos , Biópsia Guiada por Imagem , Japão/epidemiologia , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Masculino , Neoplasias da Próstata/diagnóstico por imagem , Padrões de Referência , Estudos Retrospectivos , UltrassonografiaRESUMO
ObjectiveãThe purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of age, period, birth cohort, and regional differences in the detection of breast cancer using screening data.MethodãData from the Japan Cancer Society's breast cancer screening program, collected from 21 prefectural branches between 2004 to 2015, were used to generate age-specific estimates of cancer detection for women aged between 40 to 79 years. We used Bayesian age-period-cohort (APC) analyses based on the cohort table to describe the simultaneous effects of age, period, and cohort on breast cancer detection rates to understand the population dynamics underlying the detection patterns. We also incorporated region as a random effect to examine regional characteristics.ResultsãThe age effect showed bimodality in the late 40s and late 50s. The period effect decreased from 2004 to 2007 and remained constant thereafter. The cohort effect showed that the detection rate for women born between 1943 and 1958 was high. Furthermore, we found regional differences in the breast cancer detection rate: Miyazaki, Fukui, Tochigi, and Hokkaido prefectures showed higher detection rates, while Kagoshima and Chiba prefecture had lower rates.ConclusionãAge effect has the strongest influence on the secular trend of breast cancer detection, and there is a regional difference in the detection rate. The present study that used screening data presented similar results to those of previous studies. The National Cancer Registry, based on the Cancer Registry Act of 2016, reports accurate national data. Similar to the National Cancer Registry data, analysis using screening data has immediacy and could be used for disease prevention.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Mama/epidemiologia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/estatística & dados numéricos , Programas de Rastreamento , Fatores Etários , Teorema de Bayes , Neoplasias da Mama/prevenção & controle , Estudos de Coortes , Interpretação Estatística de Dados , Japão/epidemiologia , Sistema de Registros , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
PURPOSE: To determine the effect of tomosynthesis imaging as a function of age for breast cancer screening. METHODS: Screening performance metrics from 13 institutions were examined for 12 months prior to introduction of tomosynthesis (period 1) and compared to those after introduction of tomosynthesis (period 2, range 3-22 months). Screening metrics for women ages 40-49, 50-59, 60-69, and 70+ , included rates per 1000 screens for recalls, biopsies, cancers, and invasive cancers detected. RESULTS: Performance parameters were compared for women screened with digital mammography alone (n = 278,908) and digital mammography + tomosynthesis (n = 173,414). Addition of tomosynthesis to digital mammography produced significant reductions in recall rates for all age groups and significant increases in cancer detection rates for women 40-69. Largest recall rate reduction with tomosynthesis was for women 40-49, decreasing from 137 (95% CI 117-156) to 115 (95% CI 95-135); difference, -22 (95% CI -26 to -18; P < .001). Simultaneous increase in invasive cancer detection rate for women 40-49 from 1.6 (95% CI 1.2-1.9) to 2.7 (95% CI 2.2-3.1) with tomosynthesis (difference, 1.1; 95% CI 0.6-1.6; P < .001) was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of tomosynthesis to digital mammography increased invasive cancer detection rates for women 40-69 and decreased recall rates for all age groups with largest performance gains seen in women 40-49. The similar performance seen with tomosynthesis screening for women in their 40s compared to digital mammography for women in their 50s argues strongly for commencement of mammography screening at age 40 using tomosynthesis.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Mamografia/métodos , Intensificação de Imagem Radiográfica/métodos , Adulto , Distribuição por Idade , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Neoplasias da Mama/patologia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Feminino , Humanos , Programas de Rastreamento , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Imagem Multimodal , Sensibilidade e EspecificidadeRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether biopsy cores taken via a transrectal approach from the anterior apical region of the prostate in a repeat-biopsy population can result in an increased overall cancer detection rate and in more accurate assessment of the Gleason score. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was a prospective, randomised (end-fire vs side-fire ultrasound probe) evaluation of 288 men by repeat transrectal saturation biopsy with 28 cores taken from the transition zone, base, mid-lobar, anterior and the anterior apical region located ventro-laterally to the urethra of the peripheral zone. RESULTS: The overall prostate cancer detection rate was 44.4%. Improvement of the overall detection rate by 7.8% could be achieved with additional biopsies of the anterior apical region. Two tumours featuring a Gleason score 7 could only be detected in the anterior apical region. In three cases (2.34%) Gleason score upgrading was achieved by separate analysis of each positive core of the anterior apical region. A five-fold higher cancer detection rate in the anterior apical region compared with the transition zone could be shown. CONCLUSION: Sampling of the anterior apical region results in higher overall cancer detection rate in repeat transrectal saturation biopsies of the prostate. Specimens from this region can detect clinically significant cancer, improve accuracy of the Gleason Scoring and therefore may alter therapy.
Assuntos
Próstata/patologia , Neoplasias da Próstata/patologia , Idoso , Biópsia com Agulha de Grande Calibre/métodos , Humanos , Biópsia Guiada por Imagem/métodos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Gradação de Tumores , Estudos Prospectivos , Antígeno Prostático Específico/metabolismo , Retratamento , Ultrassonografia de Intervenção/métodosRESUMO
Background An important difficulty regarding the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 3 assessment is the need for extensive diagnostic workup and an additional 6-month follow-up study. Purpose To evaluate the feasibility of the BI-RADS category 3 assessments at opportunistic screening. Material and Methods Mammography charts of 9062 screening patients in a major teaching hospital situated in an urban setting of a developing country were evaluated retrospectively (1997-2010). BI-RADS category 3 patients, called for a 6-month follow-up, which comprised a single-view spot or magnification mammogram. The length of follow-up period, compliance to periodic mammographic surveillance, cancer detection rate, and negative predictive values of category 3 assessments were calculated. Results Of the screened population, 9.2% were assigned BI-RADS category 3, and 31.2% of these cases were lost to follow-up. The mean follow-up period for 606 patients was 36.9 months. The negative predictive values for 6-month, 12-month, and final control studies were 90.9%, 87.5%, and 100%, respectively. Patient compliance for 6 months, 12 months, and any control evaluations beyond 12 months was low (50.0%, 29.8%, and 47.5%, respectively). Cancer detection rate was 0.8%. Conclusion Results of the study supports the feasibility of the BI-RADS category 3 assessments at opportunistic screening without any additional diagnostic workup. The practice of category 3 assessment following screening mammograms may be a more cost-effective method for developing countries with high recall rates and low resources in eliminating the maximum risk with minimum cost within the limits of available resources.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias da Mama/epidemiologia , Competência Clínica/estatística & dados numéricos , Países em Desenvolvimento/estatística & dados numéricos , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/estatística & dados numéricos , Mamografia/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Neoplasias da Mama/classificação , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Cooperação do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Prevalência , Prognóstico , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Medição de Risco/métodos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Turquia/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Although healthy women aged 65 years have a life expectancy of 20 years, there is a paucity of data on the performance of digital screening mammography among these women. The authors examined the performance and outcomes of digital screening mammography among a national group of women aged ≥65 years. METHODS: From Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium data for the years 2005 to 2011, the authors included 296,496 full-field digital screening mammograms among 133,042 women ages ≥65 years without a history of breast cancer. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV1 ), recall rates, and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated across the spectrum of age and breast density. Multivariate logistic regression was used to compare mammography accuracy, cancer-detection rates (CDRs), and tumor characteristics by age and breast density. RESULTS: Multivariate analyses revealed a significant decrease in the recall rate with age (P for linear trend [Ptrend ] < .001) and significant increases in specificity, PPV1 , and CDR with age (Ptrend < .001, Ptrend < .001, and Ptrend = .01, respectively). Sensitivity did not vary significantly with age. Among women with cancer, the proportion with invasive disease increased with age from 76% at ages 65 to 74 years to 81% at ages ≥80 years. There was a higher proportion of late stage cancers and positive lymph nodes among women ages 65 to 74 years compared with women in the older age groups. CONCLUSIONS: The specificity, PPV1 , recall rate, and CDR of digital screening mammography improved with increased age. In addition, as age increased, the proportion of women with invasive versus ductal carcinoma in situ rose, whereas the proportion of women with positive lymph nodes decreased.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Carcinoma Ductal de Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Carcinoma Intraductal não Infiltrante/diagnóstico por imagem , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Feminino , Humanos , Mamografia , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Estudos Prospectivos , Intensificação de Imagem Radiográfica , Estados UnidosRESUMO
PURPOSE: Cancer detection rate (CDR), an important metric in the mammography screening audit, is designed to ensure adequate sensitivity. Most practices use biopsy results as the reference standard; however, commonly ascertainment of biopsy results is incomplete. We used simulation to determine the relationship between the cancer ascertainment rate of biopsy (AR-biopsy), CDR estimation, and associated error rates in classifying whether practices and radiologists meet the established ACR benchmark of 2.5 per 1,000. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We simulated screening mammography volume, number of cancers detected, and CDR, using negative binomial and beta-binomial distributions, respectively. Simulations were performed at both the practice and radiologist level. Average CDR was based on linearly rescaling a published CDR by the AR-biopsy. CDR distributions were simulated for AR-biopsy between 5% and 100% in steps of five percentage points and were summarized with boxplots and smoothed histograms over the range of AR-biopsy, to quantify the proportion of practices and radiologists meeting the ACR benchmark at each level of AR-biopsy. RESULTS: Decreasing AR-biopsy led to an increasing probability of categorizing CDR performance as being below the ACR benchmark. Our simulation predicts that at the practice level, an AR-biopsy of 65% categorizes 17.6% below the benchmark (compared to 1.6% at an AR-biopsy of 100%), and at the radiologist level, an AR-biopsy of 65% categorizes 34.7% as being below the benchmark (compared to 11.6% at an AR-biopsy of 100%). CONCLUSIONS: Our simulation demonstrates that decreasing the AR-biopsy (in currently clinically relevant ranges) has the potential to artifactually lower the assessed CDR on both the practice and radiologist levels and may, in turn, increase the chance of erroneous categorization of underperformance per the ACR benchmark.
Assuntos
Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Neoplasias , Humanos , Mamografia , Benchmarking , BiópsiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance outcomes of a breast MRI screening program in high-risk women without prior history of breast cancer. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of 1 405 consecutive screening breast MRI examinations in 681 asymptomatic women with high risk of breast cancer without prior history of breast cancer from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2019. Outcomes (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, false-negative rate [FNR], cancer detection rate [CDR]) and characteristics of cancers were determined based on histopathology or 12-month follow-up. MRI examinations performed, BI-RADS assessments, pathology outcomes, and CDRs were analyzed overall and by age decade. Results in incidence screening round (MRI in last 18 months) and nonincidence round were compared. RESULTS: Breast MRI achieved CDR 20/1000, sensitivity 93.3% (28/30), and specificity 83.4% (1 147/1375). Twenty-eight (28/1 405, CDR 20/1000) screen-detected cancers were identified: 18 (64.3%, 18/28) invasive and 10 (35.7%, 10/28) ductal carcinoma in situ. Overall, 92.9% (26/28) of all cancers were stage 0 or 1 and 89.3% (25/28) were node negative. All 14 incidence screening round malignancies were stage 0 or 1 with N0 disease. Median size for invasive carcinoma was 8.0 mm and for ductal carcinoma in situ was 9.0 mm. There were two false-negative exams for an FNR 0.1% (2/1 405). CONCLUSION: High-risk screening breast MRI was effective at detecting early breast cancer and associated with favorable outcomes.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Carcinoma Intraductal não Infiltrante , Feminino , Humanos , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico , Carcinoma Intraductal não Infiltrante/diagnóstico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Centros de Atenção Terciária , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética/métodosRESUMO
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility of cancer detection rate (CDR) and abnormal interpretation rate (AIR) in prostate MRI for patients with low-grade prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS: This three-center retrospective study included patients who underwent prostate MRI from 2017 to 2021 with known low-grade PCa (Gleason score 6) without prior treatment. Patient-level highest Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System (PI-RADS®) score and pathologic diagnosis within 1 year after MRI were used to evaluate the diagnostic performance of prostate MRI in detecting clinically significant PCa (csPCa; Gleason score ≥ 7). The metrics AIR, CDR, and CDR adjusted for pathologic confirmation rate were calculated. Radiologist-level AIR-CDR plots were shown. Simulation AIR-CDR lines were created to assess the effects of different diagnostic performances of prostate MRI and the prevalence of csPCa. RESULTS: A total of 3,207 examinations were interpreted by 33 radiologists. Overall AIR, CDR, and CDR adjusted for pathologic confirmation rate at PI-RADS 3 to 5 (PI-RADS 4 and 5) were 51.7% (36.5%), 22.1% (18.8%), and 30.7% (24.6%), respectively. Radiologist-level AIR and CDR at PI-RADS 3 to 5 (PI-RADS 4 and 5) were in the 36.8% to 75.6% (21.9%-57.5%) range and the 16.3%-28.7% (10.9%-26.5%) range, respectively. In the simulation, changing parameters of diagnostic performance or csPCa prevalence shifted the AIR-CDR line. CONCLUSIONS: The authors propose CDR and AIR as performance metrics in prostate MRI and report reference performance values in patients with known low-grade PCa. There was variability in radiologist-level AIR and CDR. Combined use of AIR and CDR could provide meaningful feedback for radiologists to improve their performance by showing relative performance to other radiologists.
Assuntos
Próstata , Neoplasias da Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Próstata/patologia , Neoplasias da Próstata/patologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética/métodos , Gradação de TumoresRESUMO
PURPOSE: To report cancer detection rate (CDR) and abnormal interpretation rate (AIR) in prostate MRI performed for clinical suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective single-institution, three-center study included patients who underwent MRI for clinical suspicion of PCa between 2017 and 2021. Patients with known PCa were excluded. Patient-level Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score was extracted from the radiology report. AIR was defined as number of abnormal MRI (PI-RADS score 3-5) / total number of MRIs. CDR was defined as number of clinically significant PCa (csPCa: Gleason score ≥7) detected at abnormal MRI / total number of MRI. AIR, CDR, and CDR adjusted for pathology confirmation rate were calculated for each of three centers and pre-MRI biopsy status (biopsy-naive and previous negative biopsy). RESULTS: A total of 9,686 examinations (8,643 unique patients) were included. AIR, CDR, and CDR adjusted for pathology confirmation rate were 45.4%, 23.8%, and 27.6% for center I; 47.2%, 20.0%, and 22.8% for center II; and 42.3%, 27.2%, and 30.1% for center III, respectively. Pathology confirmation rate ranged from 81.6% to 88.0% across three centers. AIR and CDR for biopsy-naive patients were 45.5% to 52.6% and 24.2% to 33.5% across three centers, respectively, and those for previous negative biopsy were 27.2% to 39.8% and 11.7% to 14.2% across three centers, respectively. CONCLUSION: We reported CDR and AIR in prostate MRI for clinical suspicion of PCa. CDR needs to be adjusted for pathology confirmation rate and pre-MRI biopsy status for interfacility comparison.
Assuntos
Próstata , Neoplasias da Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Neoplasias da Próstata/diagnóstico por imagem , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Estudos Retrospectivos , Biópsia , Biópsia Guiada por ImagemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Despite its excellent screening effectiveness and sensitivity for breast cancer (BC), digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is controversial due to its high radiation exposure and long reading time. This study examines the diagnostic accuracy of DBT and digital mammography (DM) for BC screening and diagnosis in women with dense or non-dense breast tissue. MATERIAL AND METHODS: PRISMA-compliant searches were performed on Medline, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane databases for articles comparing DBT and DM for BC screening until March 2023. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan sofware, and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was employed to assess study quality. RESULTS: This meta-analysis included 11 trials with a total of 2,124,018 individuals. Screening with DBT resulted in a greater cancer detection rate, as demonstrated by a risk ratio (RR) of 1.27 (95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.14-1.41). Digital breast tomosynthesis also had a reduced recall rate, with a RR of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.78-0.99), higher sensitivity and specificity values (pooled sensitivity of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.59-0.99)) and pooled specificity of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.42-1.0)) than DM (pooled sensitivity of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.52-1.0) and pooled specificity of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.12-1.0)). All acquired data exhibited reliability, lack of bias and statistical significance (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Digital breast tomosynthesis is a more effective screening and diagnostic assessment tool for women with dense or non-dense breasts than DM in terms of incremental cancer detection, sensitivity and recall rate.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To determine (i) whether urologist seniority and experience are associated with prostate cancer (CaP) and clinically significant CaP (csCaP) detection rates using magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound (MRI/US) fusion-guided targeted biopsies, taking multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) as the reference standard, and (ii) if cancer detection rates (CDR) differ across regions of the prostate using Dickinson's 27-sector map, regardless of seniority. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed a consecutive series of patients with suspicion of prostate cancer who underwent targeted and systematic biopsies at 1 center by 1 of 7 urologists (2 seniors and 5 juniors) between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2021, following positive mpMRI. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 403 patients (454 lesions) aged 67.7±6.8. The combined (junior and senior) CDR was 57% for CaP and 28% for csCaP. There were no differences in CDR between junior and senior urologists for CaP (58% vs. 55%, Pâ¯=â¯0.538) or csCaP (29% vs. 26%, Pâ¯=â¯0.58). A general trend was observed for the learning curve, which indicated increasing CDR with urologist experience. Across the 27 sectors, combined CDR ranged between 39% and 99% for CaP and 1% to 67% for csCaP. When grouping anterior vs. posterior sectors, there were no differences in combined CDR of CaP (64% vs. 67%, Pâ¯=â¯0.48) and csCaP (31% vs. 38%, Pâ¯=â¯0.19) CONCLUSIONS: Urologist seniority is not associated with CDR, urologist experience tends to improve cancer detection, and CDR does not differ between the anterior and posterior regions of the prostate.