Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Detection Rates for Benign and Malignant Diagnoses on Breast Cancer Screening With Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in a Statewide Mammography Registry Study.
Fujii, Mayo H; Herschorn, Sally D; Sowden, Michelle; Hotaling, Elise L; Vacek, Pamela M; Weaver, Donald L; Sprague, Brian L.
Afiliação
  • Fujii MH; 1 Department of Surgery, University of Vermont, 1 S Prospect St, UHC Rm 4425, Burlington, VT 05401.
  • Herschorn SD; 2 Department of Radiology, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT.
  • Sowden M; 3 University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT.
  • Hotaling EL; 1 Department of Surgery, University of Vermont, 1 S Prospect St, UHC Rm 4425, Burlington, VT 05401.
  • Vacek PM; 3 University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT.
  • Weaver DL; 2 Department of Radiology, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT.
  • Sprague BL; 3 University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT.
AJR Am J Roentgenol ; 212(3): 706-711, 2019 03.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30673339
OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to determine whether detection rates of specific benign and malignant diagnoses differ for breast cancer screening with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) versus full-field digital mammography (FFDM) alone. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed observational data from the Vermont Breast Cancer Surveillance System, including 86,349 DBT screening examinations and 97,378 FFDM screening examinations performed at eight radiology facilities in Vermont that adopted DBT screening during 2012-2016. We determined the most severe diagnosis made within 6 months after positive screening examinations. Multivariable-adjusted logistic regression was used to compare detection rates for specific diagnoses on DBT versus FFDM. RESULTS: Compared with FFDM, DBT had a lower recall rate (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.81; 95% CI, 0.77-0.85) but comparable biopsy rate (OR = 1.05; 95% CI, 0.93-1.17), benign biopsy rate (OR = 1.12; 95% CI, 0.97-1.29), and cancer detection rate (OR = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.78-1.14). Among benign diagnoses, DBT and FFDM had comparable detection rates for nonproliferative lesions (OR = 1.19; 95% CI, 0.92-1.53), fibroepithelial proliferations (OR = 1.24; 95% CI, 0.85-1.81), proliferative lesions without atypia (OR = 1.13; 95% CI, 0.90-1.42), atypical lesions (OR = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.43-1.38), and lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) (OR = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.53-1.61). Among malignant diagnoses, DBT and FFDM had comparable detection rates for ductal carcinoma in situ (OR = 1.05; 95% CI, 0.70-1.57) and invasive breast cancer (OR = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.74-1.13), with no statistically significant differences in detection of invasive ductal carcinoma (OR = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.66-1.06), invasive lobular carcinoma (OR = 1.11; 95% CI, 0.59-2.07), or invasive mixed ductal-lobular carcinoma (OR = 1.49; 95% CI, 0.65-3.39). CONCLUSION: Compared with FFDM, breast cancer screening with DBT has a lower recall rate while detecting a similar distribution of benign and malignant diagnoses.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Screening_studies Limite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Middle aged País/Região como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Screening_studies Limite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Middle aged País/Região como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article