RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There are no consensus guidelines for supplemental breast cancer screening with whole-breast ultrasound. However, criteria for women at high risk of mammography screening failures (interval invasive cancer or advanced cancer) have been identified. Mammography screening failure risk was evaluated among women undergoing supplemental ultrasound screening in clinical practice compared with women undergoing mammography alone. METHODS: A total of 38,166 screening ultrasounds and 825,360 screening mammograms without supplemental screening were identified during 2014-2020 within three Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) registries. Risk of interval invasive cancer and advanced cancer were determined using BCSC prediction models. High interval invasive breast cancer risk was defined as heterogeneously dense breasts and BCSC 5-year breast cancer risk ≥2.5% or extremely dense breasts and BCSC 5-year breast cancer risk ≥1.67%. Intermediate/high advanced cancer risk was defined as BCSC 6-year advanced breast cancer risk ≥0.38%. RESULTS: A total of 95.3% of 38,166 ultrasounds were among women with heterogeneously or extremely dense breasts, compared with 41.8% of 825,360 screening mammograms without supplemental screening (p < .0001). Among women with dense breasts, high interval invasive breast cancer risk was prevalent in 23.7% of screening ultrasounds compared with 18.5% of screening mammograms without supplemental imaging (adjusted odds ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.30-1.39); intermediate/high advanced cancer risk was prevalent in 32.0% of screening ultrasounds versus 30.5% of screening mammograms without supplemental screening (adjusted odds ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.89-0.94). CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound screening was highly targeted to women with dense breasts, but only a modest proportion were at high mammography screening failure risk. A clinically significant proportion of women undergoing mammography screening alone were at high mammography screening failure risk.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Femenino , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Mamografía/métodos , Factores de Riesgo , Ultrasonografía Mamaria , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Densidad de la MamaRESUMEN
Background The use of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is increasing over digital mammography (DM) following studies demonstrating lower recall rates (RRs) and higher cancer detection rates (CDRs). However, inconsistent interpretation of evidence on the risks and benefits of mammography has resulted in varying screening mammography recommendations. Purpose To evaluate screening outcomes among women in the United States who underwent routine DM or DBT mammographic screening. Materials and Methods This retrospective cohort study included women aged 40-79 years who underwent DM or DBT screening mammograms between January 2014 and December 2020. Outcomes of RR, CDR, positive predictive value of recall (PPV1), biopsy rate, and positive predictive value of biopsy (PPV3) were compared between DM and DBT with use of adjusted multivariable logistic regression models. Results A total of 2 528 063 screening mammograms from 1 100 447 women (mean age, 57 years ± 10 [SD]) were included. In crude analyses, DBT (1 693 727 screening mammograms vs 834 336 DM screening mammograms) demonstrated lower RR (10.3% [95% CI: 10.3, 10.4] for DM vs 8.9% [95% CI: 8.9, 9.0] for DBT; P < .001) and higher CDR (4.5 of 1000 screening mammograms [95% CI: 4.3, 4.6] vs 5.3 of 1000 [95% CI: 5.2, 5.5]; P < .001), PPV1 (4.3% [95% CI: 4.2, 4.5] vs 5.9% [95% CI: 5.7, 6.0]; P < .001), and biopsy rates (14.5 of 1000 screening mammograms [95% CI: 14.2, 14.7] vs 17.6 of 1000 [95% CI: 17.4, 17.8]; P < .001). PPV3 was similar between cohorts (30.0% [95% CI: 29.2, 30.9] for DM vs 29.3% [95% CI: 28.7, 29.9] for DBT; P = .16). After adjustment for age, breast density, site, and index year, associations remained stable with respect to statistical significance. Conclusion Women undergoing digital breast tomosynthesis had improved screening mammography outcomes compared with women who underwent digital mammography. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Bae and Seo in this issue.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Mamografía , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Densidad de la Mama , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Mamografía/métodos , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: We evaluated self-report of decision quality and regret with breast cancer surgical treatment by pre-operative breast MRI use in women recently diagnosed with breast cancer. METHODS: We conducted a survey with 957 women aged 18 + with stage 0-III breast cancer identified in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Participants self-reported receipt of pre-operative breast MRI. Primary outcomes were process measures in the Breast Cancer Surgery Decision Quality Instrument (BCS-DQI) (continuous outcome) and Decision Regret Scale (dichotomized outcome as any/none). Generalized estimating equations with linear and logit link were used to estimate adjusted associations between breast MRI and primary outcomes. All analyses were also stratified by breast density. RESULTS: Survey participation rate was 27.9% (957/3430). Study population was primarily > 60 years, White, college educated, and diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer. Pre-operative breast MRI was reported in 46% of women. A higher proportion of women who were younger age (< 50 years), commercially insured, and self-detected their breast cancer reported pre-operative breast MRI use. In adjusted analysis, pre-operative breast MRI use compared with no use was associated with a small but statistically significantly higher decision quality scores (69.5 vs 64.7, p-value = 0.043). Decision regret did not significantly differ in women who reported pre-operative breast MRI use compared with no use (54.2% v. 48.7%, respectively, p-value = 0.11). Study results did not vary when stratified by breast density for either primary outcome. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Breast MRI use in the diagnostic work-up of breast cancer does not negatively alter women's perceptions of surgical treatment decisions in early survivorship. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03029286.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Densidad de la Mama , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Toma de Decisiones , Emociones , Femenino , Humanos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , MastectomíaRESUMEN
Background The COVID-19 pandemic reduced mammography use, potentially delaying breast cancer diagnoses. Purpose To examine breast biopsy recommendations and breast cancers diagnosed before and during the COVID-19 pandemic by mode of detection (screen detected vs symptomatic) and women's characteristics. Materials and Methods In this secondary analysis of prospectively collected data, monthly breast biopsy recommendations after mammography, US, or both with subsequent biopsy performed were examined from 66 facilities of the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium between January 2019 and September 2020. The number of monthly and cumulative biopsies recommended and performed and the number of subsequent cancers diagnosed during the pandemic period (March 2020 to September 2020) were compared with data from the prepandemic period using Wald χ2 tests. Analyses were stratified by mode of detection and race or ethnicity. Results From January 2019 to September 2020, 17 728 biopsies were recommended and performed, with 6009 cancers diagnosed. From March to September 2020, there were substantially fewer breast biopsy recommendations with cancer diagnoses when compared with the same period in 2019 (1650 recommendations in 2020 vs 2171 recommendations in 2019 [24% fewer], P < .001), predominantly due to fewer screen-detected cancers (722 cancers in 2020 vs 1169 cancers in 2019 [38% fewer], P < .001) versus symptomatic cancers (895 cancers in 2020 vs 965 cancers in 2019 [7% fewer], P = .27). The decrease in cancer diagnoses was largest in Asian (67 diagnoses in 2020 vs 142 diagnoses in 2019 [53% fewer], P = .06) and Hispanic (82 diagnoses in 2020 vs 145 diagnoses in 2019 [43% fewer], P = .13) women, followed by Black women (210 diagnoses in 2020 vs 287 diagnoses in 2019 [27% fewer], P = .21). The decrease was smallest in non-Hispanic White women (1128 diagnoses in 2020 vs 1357 diagnoses in 2019 [17% fewer], P = .09). Conclusion There were substantially fewer breast biopsies with cancer diagnoses during the COVID-19 pandemic from March to September 2020 compared with the same period in 2019, with Asian and Hispanic women experiencing the largest declines, followed by Black women. © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Heller in this issue.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , COVID-19 , Biopsia , Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Mama/patología , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , PandemiasRESUMEN
Importance: Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) was developed with the expectation of improving cancer detection in women with dense breasts. Studies are needed to evaluate interval invasive and advanced breast cancer rates, intermediary outcomes related to breast cancer mortality, by breast density and breast cancer risk. Objective: To evaluate whether DBT screening is associated with a lower likelihood of interval invasive cancer and advanced breast cancer compared with digital mammography by extent of breast density and breast cancer risk. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cohort study of 504â¯427 women aged 40 to 79 years who underwent 1â¯003â¯900 screening digital mammography and 375â¯189 screening DBT examinations from 2011 through 2018 at 44 US Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) facilities with follow-up for cancer diagnoses through 2019 by linkage to state or regional cancer registries. Exposures: Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) breast density; BCSC 5-year breast cancer risk. Main Outcomes and Measures: Rates per 1000 examinations of interval invasive cancer within 12 months of screening mammography and advanced breast cancer (prognostic pathologic stage II or higher) within 12 months of screening mammography, both estimated with inverse probability weighting. Results: Among 504â¯427 women in the study population, the median age at time of mammography was 58 years (IQR, 50-65 years). Interval invasive cancer rates per 1000 examinations were not significantly different for DBT vs digital mammography (overall, 0.57 vs 0.61, respectively; difference, -0.04; 95% CI, -0.14 to 0.06; P = .43) or among all the 836â¯250 examinations with BCSC 5-year risk less than 1.67% (low to average-risk) or all the 413â¯061 examinations with BCSC 5-year risk of 1.67% or higher (high risk) across breast density categories. Advanced cancer rates were not significantly different for DBT vs digital mammography among women at low to average risk or at high risk with almost entirely fatty, scattered fibroglandular densities, or heterogeneously dense breasts. Advanced cancer rates per 1000 examinations were significantly lower for DBT vs digital mammography for the 3.6% of women with extremely dense breasts and at high risk of breast cancer (13â¯291 examinations in the DBT group and 31â¯300 in the digital mammography group; 0.27 vs 0.80 per 1000 examinations; difference, -0.53; 95% CI, -0.97 to -0.10) but not for women at low to average risk (10â¯611 examinations in the DBT group and 37â¯796 in the digital mammography group; 0.54 vs 0.42 per 1000 examinations; difference, 0.12; 95% CI, -0.09 to 0.32). Conclusions and Relevance: Screening with DBT vs digital mammography was not associated with a significant difference in risk of interval invasive cancer and was associated with a significantly lower risk of advanced breast cancer among the 3.6% of women with extremely dense breasts and at high risk of breast cancer. No significant difference was observed in the 96.4% of women with nondense breasts, heterogeneously dense breasts, or with extremely dense breasts not at high risk.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Mama , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Mamografía , Tamizaje Masivo , Adulto , Anciano , Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Mama/patología , Densidad de la Mama , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Estudios de Cohortes , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Femenino , Humanos , Mamografía/métodos , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Invasividad Neoplásica/diagnóstico por imagen , Invasividad Neoplásica/patología , Riesgo , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted breast cancer screening and diagnostic imaging in the United States. We sought to evaluate how medical facilities prioritized breast imaging services during periods of reduced capacity or upon re-opening after closures. In fall 2020, we surveyed 77 breast imaging facilities within the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium in the United States. The survey ascertained the pandemic's impact on clinical practices during March-September 2020. Nearly all facilities (97%) reported closing or operating at reduced capacity at some point during this period. All facilities were open by August 2020, though 14% were still operating at reduced capacity in September 2020. During periods of re-opening or reduced capacity, 93% of facilities reported prioritizing diagnostic breast imaging over breast cancer screening. For diagnostic imaging, facilities prioritized based on rescheduling canceled appointments (89%), specific indication for diagnostic imaging (89%), patient demand (84%), individual characteristics and risk factors (77%), and time since last imaging examination (72%). For screening mammography, facilities prioritized based on rescheduled cancelations (96%), patient demand (83%), individual characteristics and risk factors (73%), and time since last mammogram (71%). For biopsy services, more than 90% of facilities reported prioritization based on rescheduling of canceled exams, patient demand, patient characteristics and risk factors and level of suspicion on imaging. The observed patterns from this large and geographically diverse sample of facilities in the United States indicate that multiple factors were commonly used to prioritize breast imaging services during periods of reduced capacity.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , COVID-19 , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Femenino , Humanos , Mamografía , Tamizaje Masivo , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE. One central question pertaining to mammography quality relates to discerning the optimal recall rate to maximize cancer detection while minimizing unnecessary downstream diagnostic imaging and breast biopsies. We examined the trade-offs for higher recall rates in terms of biopsy recommendations and cancer detection in a single large health care organization. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We included 2D analog, 2D digital, and 3D digital (tomosynthesis) screening mammography examinations among women 40-79 years old performed between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2017, with cancer follow-up through 2018. There were 36, 67, and 38 radiologists who read at least 1000 2D analog examinations, 2D digital examinations, and 3D tomosynthesis examinations, respectively, who were included in these analyses. Using logistic regression with marginal standardization, we estimated radiologist-specific mean recall (abnormal interpretations/1000 mammograms), biopsy recommendation, cancer detection (screening-detected in situ and invasive cancers/1000 mammograms), and minimally invasive cancer detection rates while adjusting for differences in patient characteristics. RESULTS. Among 1,060,655 screening mammograms, the mean recall rate was 10.7%, the cancer detection rate was 4.0/1000 mammograms, and the biopsy recommendation rate was 1.60%. Recall rates between 7% and 9% appeared to maximize cancer detection while minimizing unnecessary biopsies. CONCLUSION. The results of this investigation are in contrast to those of a recent study suggesting appropriateness of higher recall rates. The "sweet spot" for optimal cancer detection appears to be in the recall rate range of 7-9% for both 2D digital mammography and 3D tomosynthesis. Too many women are being called back for diagnostic imaging, and new benchmarks could be set to reduce this burden.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Mamografía , Adulto , Anciano , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Chicago , Femenino , Humanos , Mamografía/métodos , Mamografía/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Sistema de Registros/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
Pterygoid plate fractures are often described in the setting of Le Fort fractures. The goal of this study was to define other craniofacial fracture patterns causing injury to the pterygoid plates. A retrospective review of computed tomography (CT) scans obtained on craniofacial trauma patients over a 5-year period revealed 209 patients with pterygoid plate fractures. Pterygoid plate fractures in 78 patients (37.3%) were unrelated to Le Fort fractures. Common causes included sphenotemporal buttress fractures in 26 patients (33.3%), temporal bone fractures in 18 patients (23.1%), zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures in 17 patients (21.8%), and displaced mandible fractures in 14 patients (17.9%). These findings indicate that approximately one third of pterygoid plate fractures do not result from Le Fort pattern injuries and that the craniofacial surgeon should have a broad differential for causes of pterygoid plate fractures when reviewing trauma imaging.
Asunto(s)
Fracturas Maxilares/epidemiología , Fracturas Craneales/epidemiología , Hueso Esfenoides/lesiones , Proceso Alveolar/lesiones , Humanos , Fracturas Mandibulares/epidemiología , Hueso Nasal/lesiones , Estudios Retrospectivos , Base del Cráneo/lesiones , Hueso Temporal/lesiones , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/estadística & datos numéricos , Wisconsin/epidemiología , Fracturas Cigomáticas/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Sinovenous thrombosis (SVT) is a well-recognized and serious complication in children treated for acute leukemia. This frequently occurs during or immediately upon completion of induction therapy and is commonly attributed to asparaginase therapy.Headache is the first and most common clinical symptom to occur during the early development of SVT. With advancement of the thrombosis, the clinical symptoms can progress to increased sleepiness, focal neurological deficit, seizures, and altered consciousness. We report the case of a 4-year-old girl who presented after several days of headaches and anorexia, which then progressed to seizures, left-sided weakness, and altered consciousness. She was later found to have a widespread and occlusive SVT with right cerebral hemorrhagic infarction. This case is notable for the extensive nature of the cerebral SVT and the child's complete clinical recovery from the neurological event. The report discusses the relation of the thrombosis and leukemia and also emphasizes the importance of early recognition and prompt management, while incorporating a collaborative multidisciplinary approach to prevent long-term consequences.
Asunto(s)
Infarto Encefálico/etiología , Hemorragias Intracraneales/etiología , Leucemia-Linfoma Linfoblástico de Células T Precursoras/complicaciones , Leucemia-Linfoma Linfoblástico de Células T Precursoras/terapia , Trombosis de los Senos Intracraneales/etiología , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Infarto Encefálico/terapia , Preescolar , Resultado Fatal , Femenino , Humanos , Hemorragias Intracraneales/terapia , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Trombosis de los Senos Intracraneales/terapiaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to determine if six MRI findings of the proximal hamstrings differ in frequency in hamstrings with and without symptoms of tendinopathy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed the MRI examinations of 118 consecutive patients who had undergone pelvis MRI and evaluation by a musculoskeletal clinical specialist. The proximal hamstrings were evaluated at four consecutive axial locations for tendon size, internal T1 and T2 signal, peritendinous T2 signal, and ischial tuberosity edema. Statistical analysis was performed to determine the association of the MRI findings with symptomatic hamstring tendinopathy. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients had a clinical diagnosis of unilateral proximal hamstring tendinopathy. The mean width or anteroposterior size was significantly larger in symptomatic hamstrings at all three proximal levels (p = 0.002-0.040). More than 90% of hamstring tendons had increased internal T1 or T2 signal that was not associated with hamstring symptoms. Both hamstrings with and without symptoms of tendinopathy had peritendinous T2 signal, but this was significantly more common in hamstrings with tendinopathy symptoms at the three most distal levels (p = 0.001-0.041). Ischial tuberosity edema and a feathery appearance of the peritendinous T2 signal distally were significantly more common in symptomatic hamstrings (p = 0.004 and 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Increased T1 and T2 signal is commonly seen within the proximal hamstrings but is not associated with symptoms of hamstring tendinopathy. Increased tendon size, peritendinous T2 signal with a distal feathery appearance, and ischial tuberosity edema are significantly associated with symptomatic hamstring tendinopathy but can be seen in asymptomatic individuals.
Asunto(s)
Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Tendinopatía/patología , Tendones/patología , Muslo , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Niño , Preescolar , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in conjunction with digital mammography (DM) is becoming the preferred imaging modality for breast cancer screening compared with DM alone, on the basis of improved recall rates (RR) and cancer detection rates (CDRs). The aim of this study was to investigate racial differences in the utilization and performance of screening modality. METHODS: Retrospective data from 63 US breast imaging facilities from 2015 to 2019 were reviewed. Screening outcomes were linked to cancer registries. RR, CDR per 1,000 examinations, and positive predictive value for recall (cancers/recalled patients) were compared. RESULTS: A total of 385,503 women contributed 542,945 DBT and 261,359 DM screens. A lower proportion of screenings for Black women were performed using DBT plus DM (referred to as DBT) (44% for Black, 48% for other, 63% for Asian, and 61% for White). Non-White women were less likely to undergo more than one mammographic examination. RRs were lower for DBT among all women (8.74 versus 10.06, P < .05) and lower across all races and within age categories. RRs were significantly higher for women with only one mammogram. CDRs were similar or higher in women undergoing DBT compared with DM, overall (4.73 versus 4.60, adjusted P = .0005) and by age and race. Positive predictive value for recall was greater for DBT overall (5.29 versus 4.45, adjusted P < .0001) and by age, race, and screening frequency. CONCLUSIONS: All racial groups had improved outcomes with DBT screening, but disparities were observed in DBT utilization. These data suggest that reducing inequities in DBT utilization may improve the effectiveness of breast cancer screening.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Femenino , Humanos , Mamografía , Tamizaje Masivo , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to a near-total cessation of mammography services in the United States in mid-March 2020. It is unclear if screening and diagnostic mammography volumes have recovered to prepandemic levels and whether use has varied by women's characteristics. METHODS: We collected data on 461 083 screening mammograms and 112 207 diagnostic mammograms conducted during January 2019 through July 2020 at 62 radiology facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. We compared monthly screening and diagnostic mammography volumes before and during the pandemic stratified by age, race and ethnicity, breast density, and family history of breast cancer. RESULTS: Screening and diagnostic mammography volumes in April 2020 were 1.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.5% to 2.4%) and 21.4% (95% CI = 18.7% to 24.4%) of the April 2019 prepandemic volumes, respectively, but by July 2020 had rebounded to 89.7% (95% CI = 79.6% to 101.1%) and 101.6% (95% CI = 93.8% to 110.1%) of the July 2019 prepandemic volumes, respectively. The year-to-date cumulative volume of screening and diagnostic mammograms performed through July 2020 was 66.2% (95% CI = 60.3% to 72.6%) and 79.9% (95% CI = 75.4% to 84.6%), respectively, of year-to-date volume through July 2019. Screening mammography rebound was similar across age groups and by family history of breast cancer. Monthly screening mammography volume in July 2020 for Black, White, Hispanic, and Asian women reached 96.7% (95% CI = 88.1% to 106.1%), 92.9% (95% CI = 82.9% to 104.0%), 72.7% (95% CI = 56.5% to 93.6%), and 51.3% (95% CI = 39.7% to 66.2%) of the July 2019 prepandemic volume, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a strong overall rebound in mammography volume by July 2020, the rebound lagged among Asian and Hispanic women, and a substantial cumulative deficit in missed mammograms accumulated, which may have important health consequences.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , COVID-19/epidemiología , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/estadística & datos numéricos , Etnicidad/psicología , Mamografía/estadística & datos numéricos , Sistema de Registros/estadística & datos numéricos , SARS-CoV-2/aislamiento & purificación , Adulto , Anciano , Neoplasias de la Mama/psicología , COVID-19/virología , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To compare outcomes associated with breast cancer screening with digital mammography (DM) alone versus in combination with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in a large representative cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 325,729 screening mammograms from 247,431 women were analyzed, across two healthcare systems, from June 2015 to September 2017. Patient level demographic, calculated risk levels, and clinical outcomes were extracted from radiology information system and electronic medical records. Multivariable regression modeling adjusting for institution, age, breast density, and first exam was conducted to compare patient characteristics, recall rates, time to biopsy and final diagnosis, clinical outcomes, and diagnostic performance. Participating institutions and the Coordinating Center received Institutional Review Board approval for a waiver of consent to collect and link data and perform analysis. RESULTS: A total of 194,437 (59.7%) screens were DBT versus 131,292 (40.3%) with DM. Women with dense breasts and higher calculated risk were more likely to be screened with DBT. Recall rates were lower for DBT overall (8.83% DBT vs 10.98% DM, adjusted odds ratio, 95% confidence intervalâ¯=â¯0.85, 0.83-0.87) and across all age groups, races, and breast densities, and at facilities that used predominantly DBT (8.05%) versus predominantly DM (11.22%), or a combination (10.73%). The most common diagnostic pathway after recall was mammography and ultrasound. Women recalled from DBT were more likely to proceed directly to ultrasound. The median time to biopsy (18 vs 22 days) and final diagnosis (10 vs 13 days) was shorter for DBT. The adjusted cancer rate, cancer detection rate, and specificity were higher for DBT. CONCLUSION: DBT demonstrated a more efficient screening pathway and improved quality measures with lower recall rates in all patient types, reduced diagnostic mammography and shorter time to biopsy and final diagnosis.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Mamografía/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Anciano , Biopsia/estadística & datos numéricos , Densidad de la Mama/fisiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Estudios de Cohortes , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/estadística & datos numéricos , Utilización de Instalaciones y Servicios , Femenino , Humanos , Aprendizaje del Sistema de Salud , Tamizaje Masivo/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Oportunidad Relativa , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To evaluate comparative associations of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) and mammographic breast density with subsequent breast cancer risk. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We examined women undergoing breast MRI in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium from 2005 to 2015 (with one exam in 2000) using qualitative BPE assessments of minimal, mild, moderate, or marked. Breast density was assessed on mammography performed within 5 years of MRI. Among women diagnosed with breast cancer, the first BPE assessment was included if it was more than 3 months before their first diagnosis. Breast cancer risk associated with BPE was estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Among 4,247 women, 176 developed breast cancer (invasive, n = 129; ductal carcinoma in situ,n = 47) over a median follow-up time of 2.8 years. More women with cancer had mild, moderate, or marked BPE than women without cancer (80% v 66%, respectively). Compared with minimal BPE, increasing BPE levels were associated with significantly increased cancer risk (mild: hazard ratio [HR], 1.80; 95% CI, 1.12 to 2.87; moderate: HR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.51 to 3.86; and marked: HR, 3.41; 95% CI, 2.05 to 5.66). Compared with women with minimal BPE and almost entirely fatty or scattered fibroglandular breast density, women with mild, moderate, or marked BPE demonstrated elevated cancer risk if they had almost entirely fatty or scattered fibroglandular breast density (HR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.19 to 4.46) or heterogeneous or extremely dense breasts (HR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.44 to 4.72), with no significant interaction (P = .82). Combined mild, moderate, and marked BPE demonstrated significantly increased risk of invasive cancer (HR, 2.73; 95% CI, 1.66 to 4.49) but not ductal carcinoma in situ (HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 0.72 to 3.05). CONCLUSION: BPE is associated with future invasive breast cancer risk independent of breast density. BPE should be considered for risk prediction models for women undergoing breast MRI.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Carcinoma Ductal de Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Densidad de la Mama , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Carcinoma Ductal de Mama/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Aumento de la Imagen/métodos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/estadística & datos numéricos , Mamografía/métodos , Mamografía/estadística & datos numéricos , Invasividad Neoplásica , Tejido Parenquimatoso/diagnóstico por imagen , Sistema de Registros , Factores de Riesgo , Programa de VERF , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Over 150,000 patients present with maxillofacial trauma annually to emergency rooms in the United States. Although maxillofacial computed tomography is a sensitive screening tool for identifying facial fractures, indiscriminate use leads to unnecessary radiation exposure and substantial costs. A decision instrument is needed to ensure computed tomographic evaluation of patients at high risk for facial fracture and limit computed tomography use in low-risk patients. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of all patients evaluated at a Level I trauma center over a 3-year period. Inclusion criteria were maxillofacial examination on presentation, maxillofacial computed tomography, and head computed tomography. A total of 525 patients met the enrollment criteria. RESULTS: Injury to the maxillofacial skeleton occurred in 332 patients (63.2 percent). The presence of any of the following five physical examination criteria identified patients at high risk for facial fracture: bony stepoff or instability, periorbital swelling or contusion, Glasgow Coma Scale score less than 14, malocclusion, or tooth absence. These criteria identified all but six of the 332 patients with a facial fracture (sensitivity, 98.2 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 96.5 to 99.1 percent). The negative predictive value was 87.8 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 76.3 to 94.2 percent). No patient determined by these criteria to be at low risk for a facial fracture required surgical treatment. If these criteria had been applied to the study population, radiographic imaging could have been avoided in 9.3 percent of patients. CONCLUSIONS: A decision instrument based on clinical criteria can ensure appropriate screening of patients at high risk for facial fracture. Application of this instrument may reduce unnecessary maxillofacial imaging.