Digital Mammography In Women Research Articles

Diagnostic accuracy of digital breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography in women with dense or non-dense breast tissue: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

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. 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. 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). 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.

Effectiveness of hybrid digital breast tomosynthesis/digital mammography compared to digital mammography in women presenting for routine screening at Maroondah BreastScreen: Study protocol for a co-designed, non-randomised prospective trial

BackgroundDigital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) for breast cancer screening has been shown in international trials to increase cancer detection compared with mammography; however, results have varied across screening settings, and currently there is limited and conflicting evidence on interval cancer rates (a surrogate for screening effectiveness). Australian pilot data also indicated substantially longer screen-reading time for DBT posing a barrier for adoption. There is a critical need for evidence on DBT to inform its role in Australia, including evaluation of potentially more feasible models of implementation, and quantification of screening outcomes by breast density which has global relevance. MethodsThis study is a prospective trial embedded in population-based Australian screening services (Maroondah BreastScreen, Eastern Health, Victoria) comparing hybrid screening comprising DBT (mediolateral oblique view) and digital mammography (cranio-caudal view) with standard mammography screening in a concurrent group attending another screening site. All eligible women aged ≥40 years attending the Maroondah service for routine screening will be enrolled (unless they do not provide verbal consent and opt-out of hybrid screening; are unable to provide consent; or where a ‘pushback’ image on hybrid DBT cannot be obtained). Each arm will enrol 20,000 women. The primary outcomes are cancer detection rate (per 1000 screens) and recall rate (percentage). Secondary outcomes include ‘opt-out’ rate; cohort characteristics; cancer characteristics; assessment outcomes; screen-reading time; and interval cancer rate at 24-month follow-up. Automated volumetric breast density will be measured to allow stratification of outcomes by mammographic density. Stratification by age and screening round will also be undertaken. An interim analysis will be undertaken after the first 5000 screens in the intervention group. DiscussionThis is the first Australian prospective trial comparing hybrid DBT/mammography with standard mammography screening that is powered to show differences in cancer detection. Findings will inform future implementation of DBT in screening programs world-wide and provide evidence on whether DBT should be adopted in the broader BreastScreen program in Australia or in subgroups of screening participants.

EE112 Cost-Effectiveness of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in Mammography Screening in Women With High Breast Density From a Czech Perspective

Women with high breast density have a higher risk of breast cancer and a lower likelihood of detecting a lesion with standard mammography screening. Digital breast tomosynthesis is a three-dimensional imaging modality that offers superior diagnostic performance compared with two-dimensional digital mammography in women with high breast density. The study objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of digital breast tomosynthesis in mammography screening in women with high breast density from Czech payers’ perspective.

Dedicated breast computed-tomography in women with a personal history of breast cancer: A proof-of-concept study

PurposeTo compare the subjective image quality assessment using B-CT and digital mammography in women with personal history of breast cancer (PHBC). MethodIn this retrospective study 32 patients with PHBC were included. Each patient had undergone a B-CT examination and a previous mammogram in a time interval of less than 18 months between the two examinations. Two radiologists evaluated the two examinations independently with regard to the presence of lesions, BI-RADS classification, level of confidence for the overall exam interpretation, scar evaluation and image quality including image degradation due to clip artifacts. Level of confidence and image quality were assessed using a 5-point Likert scale. A p-value of less than 0.01 was considered statistically significant. ResultsThirty-seven operated and 27 non-operated breasts were included. Confidence for the overall interpretation with B-CT was equal or superior to mammography in 63 cases (98.4 %) for reader 1 and in 58 cases (90.6 %) for reader 2 (p <.001). Confidence for scar evaluation with B-CT was equal or superior to mammography in all cases for reader 1 and in 34 cases (91.9 %) for readers 2 (p <.001). One case with local recurrence in B-CT was identified by both readers and no false positive findings were reported. A moderate to high image degradation due to beam-hardening artifacts has been reported by both readers in 29.4 % of cases due to surgical clips in the B-CT volume. ConclusionsB-CT in patients with PHBC provides high quality images that can be evaluated with confidence equal or superior to mammography.

Mean glandular dose in the mammary gland and dose of radiation in the thyroid gland and lens in women with and without breast implants during different modalities of mammography

There have always been concerns about the secondary effects of diagnostic methods that use ionizing radiation. During mammography, the parameters to be concerned about are the mean glandular dose and the scatter dose. We evaluated the dose of radiation to the breast, thyroid gland, and lens in digital mammography in women with and without implants, in tomosynthesis in women with and without implants, and in contrast-enhanced mammography. Materials and methodsThe study included 212 women with and without disease who were attended at the Centro Clínico de Estereotaxia, CECLINES, in Caracas, Venezuela, between June 2017 and August 2017; the women were classified into five groups according to the mammographic modality used to evaluate them and whether or not they had implants. The statistical analysis included descriptive statistics for the study population. We used the Mann-Whitney U to compare the mean glandular dose and dose in the thyroid gland and lens between groups. ResultsThe mean glandular dose and the dose of radiation received in the thyroid and lens were within the acceptable range. In a few exceptions, the mean glandular dose per view was slightly higher than 3 mGy. The scatter dose to the thyroid gland and the lens during mammography has a very small contribution to the annual dose equivalent. ConclusionThe mean glandular dose and the scatter dose to the thyroid gland and lens delivered during tomosynthesis and 2D mammography in women with implants were higher than those delivered during other mammographic techniques in women without implants.

Dosis glandular promedio en glándula mamaria y dosis de radiación en glándula tiroides y cristalino en mujeres con y sin implantes mamarios durante diferentes modalidades mamográficas

There have always been concerns about the secondary effects of diagnostic methods that use ionizing radiation. During mammography, the parameters to be concerned about are the mean glandular dose and the scatter dose. We evaluated the dose of radiation to the breast, thyroid gland, and lens in digital mammography in women with and without implants, in tomosynthesis in women with and without implants, and in contrast-enhanced mammography. Materials and methodsThe study included 212 women with and without disease who were attended at the Centro Clínico de Estereotaxia, CECLINES, in Caracas, Venezuela, between June 2017 and August 2017; the women were classified into five groups according to the mammographic modality used to evaluate them and whether or not they had implants. The statistical analysis included descriptive statistics for the study population. We used the Mann-Whitney U to compare the mean glandular dose and dose in the thyroid gland and lens between groups. ResultsThe mean glandular dose and the dose of radiation received in the thyroid and lens were within the acceptable range. In a few exceptions, the mean glandular dose per view was slightly higher than 3mGy. The scatter dose to the thyroid gland and the lens during mammography has a very small contribution to the annual dose equivalent. ConclusionThe mean glandular dose and the scatter dose to the thyroid gland and lens delivered during tomosynthesis and 2D mammography in women with implants were higher than those delivered during other mammographic techniques in women without implants.

Does three-dimensional functional infrared imaging improve breast cancer detection based on digital mammography in women with dense breasts?

PurposeWe aimed to estimate the incremental cancer detection rate achieved by adding three-dimensional functional infrared imaging (3DIRI) to digital mammography in women with dense breasts.Materials and methodsIn this prospective study conducted between December 2014 and April 2016, 1727 women (median age 56) with percentage volumetric breast density > 6% were recruited at routine screening mammography to undergo additional 3DIRI. The 3DIRI findings were classified as negative or positive. Women with a negative mammography but positive 3DIRI were referred to dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, whereas all other women underwent routine follow-up based on the mammography finding. Diagnosis of breast cancer was verified by histopathologic examination. The number of women diagnosed with a malignancy formed the basis of our statistical analysis.ResultsMammography detected 7 cancers in 7 women. Of 1692 women with negative mammography, 222 women (13%) had a positive 3DIRI of which 219 underwent MRI. An additional 6 cancers were identified in 5 women, increasing the diagnostic yield from 7 of 1727 (0.41%) to 12 of 1727 (0.69%). The incremental cancer detection rate associated with using 3DIRI to select women for MRI was 5 of 222 (22.5 additional cancers per 1000).ConclusionThe use of 3DIRI to select women for an additional MRI can result in the detection of additional cancers in women with dense breasts, but at the expense of additional false positives and considerably lower positive predictive value of the combined examinations. Additional studies are necessary to evaluate the role of 3DIRI as an adjunct to mammography.Key Points• Use of three-dimensional functional infrared imaging to select women for an MRI in addition to screening mammography has the potential to improve breast cancer detection in women with dense breasts.

Digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer screening and diagnosis in women with dense breasts \u2013 a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundThis study aimed to systematically review and to meta-analyse the accuracy of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) versus digital mammography (DM) in women with mammographically dense breasts in screening and diagnosis.MethodsTwo independent reviewers identified screening or diagnostic studies reporting at least one of four outcomes (cancer detection rate-CDR, recall rate, sensitivity and specificity) for DBT and DM in women with mammographically dense breasts. Study quality was assessed using QUADAS-2. Meta-analysis of CDR and recall rate used a random effects model. Summary ROC curve summarized sensitivity and specificity.ResultsSixteen studies were included (five diagnostic; eleven screening). In diagnosis, DBT increased sensitivity (84%–90%) versus DM alone (69%–86%) but not specificity. DBT improved CDR versus DM alone (RR: 1.16, 95% CI 1.02–1.31). In screening, DBT + DM increased CDR versus DM alone (RR: 1.33, 95% CI 1.20–1.47 for retrospective studies; RR: 1.52, 95% CI 1.08–2.11 for prospective studies). Recall rate was significantly reduced by DBT + DM in retrospective studies (RR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.64–0.80) but not in two prospective studies (RR: 1.12, 95% CI 0.76–1.63).ConclusionIn women with mammographically dense breasts, DBT+/−DM increased CDR significantly (versus DM) in screening and diagnosis. In diagnosis, DBT+/−DM increased sensitivity but not specificity. The effect of DBT + DM on recall rate in screening dense breasts varied between studies.

Erratum to: Diagnostic performance of tomosynthesis and breast ultrasonography in women with dense breasts: a prospective comparison study.

Purpose To compare the diagnostic performances of tomosynthesis and ultrasonography as adjunctives to digital mammography in women with dense breasts.

The use of ultrasonography and digital mammography in women under 40years with symptomatic breast cancer: a 7-year Irish experience.

Breast cancer in women under 40years of age is rare and typically presents symptomatically. The optimal imaging modality for this patient group is controversial. Most women undergo ultrasonography with/without mammography. Young women typically have dense breasts, which can obscure the features of malignancy on film mammography, however, initial studies have suggested that digital mammography may have a more accurate diagnostic performance in younger women. Ultrasound generally performs well in this age group, although it is poor at detecting carcinoma in situ (DCIS). To evaluate the comparative diagnostic performance of ultrasonography and digital mammography in the initial diagnostic evaluation of women under 40years of age with symptomatic breast cancer. Retrospective review of all women under the age of 40years managed at our symptomatic breast cancer unit from January 2009 to December 2015. There were 120 patients that met the inclusion criteria for this study. The sensitivity of ultrasonography and digital mammography for breast cancer in this patient group was 95.8 and 87.5%, respectively. The patients with a false negative mammographic examination were more likely to have dense breasts (p<0.01). Five patients had a false negative ultrasonographic examination, withal of whom were diagnosed with DCIS detected by mammography. This study demonstrates the superior sensitivity of ultrasound for breast cancer in women under the age of 40years, however, the results show that digital mammography has an important complimentary role in the comprehensive assessment of these patients, particularly in the diagnosis of DCIS.

Implications of CISNET modeling on number needed to screen and mortality reduction with digital mammography in women 40-49 years old.

In this article, we evaluate the implications of recent Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) modeling of benefits and harms of screening to women 40-49 years old using annual digital mammography. We show that adding annual digital mammography of women 40-49 years old to biennial screening of women 50-74 years old increases lives saved by 27% and life-years gained by 47%. Annual digital mammography in women 40-49 years old saves 42% more lives and life-years than biennial digital mammography. The number needed to screen to save one life (NNS) with annual digital mammography in women 40-49 years old is 588.

Screen-film versus full-field digital mammography: Radiation dose and image quality in a large teaching hospital

The objective of this paper is to measure the radiation dose and image quality in conventional screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography in women referred to mammography examination. Participants underwent bilateral, two-view screen-film mammography or full-field digital mammography. The visibility of anatomical regions and overall clinical image quality was rated by experienced radiologists. Total of 387 women and 1548 mammograms were enrolled in the study. Image quality was assessed in terms of image quality score, whereas patient dose assessment was performed in terms of mean glandular dose. Average mean glandular dose for cranio-caudal projection was 1.5 mGy and 2.1 mGy in full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography, respectively. For medio-lateral oblique projection, corresponding values were 2.3 and 2.1 mGy. Overall image quality criteria scoring was 0.82 and 0.99 for screen-film and digital systems, respectively. The scores were in the range from 0.11 to 1.0 for different anatomical structures. Overall, full-field digital mammography was superior both in terms of image quality and dose over the screen-film mammography. The results have indicated that phantom dose values can assist in setting the optimisation activities in mammography and for comparison between mammography units. To obtain accurate diagnostic information with an acceptable radiation dose to breast, it is necessary to periodically perform patient dose and image quality surveys in all mammography units.

Cost-effectiveness of digital mammography breast cancer screening.

The DMIST (Digital Mammography Imaging Screening Trial) reported improved breast cancer detection with digital mammography compared with film mammography in selected population subgroups, but it did not assess the economic value of digital relative to film mammography screening. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of digital mammography screening for breast cancer. Validated, discrete-event simulation model. Data from DMIST and publicly available U.S. data. U.S. women age 40 years or older. Lifetime. Societal and Medicare. All-film mammography screening; all-digital mammography screening; and targeted digital mammography screening, which is age-targeted digital mammography (for women <50 years of age) and age- and density-targeted digital mammography (for women <50 years of age or women > or =50 years of age with dense breasts). Cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. All-digital mammography screening cost $331,000 (95% CI, $268,000 to $403,000) per QALY gained relative to all-film mammography screening but was more costly and less effective than targeted digital mammography screening. Targeted digital mammography screening resulted in more screen-detected cases of cancer and fewer deaths from cancer than either all-film or all-digital mammography screening, with cost-effectiveness estimates ranging from $26,500 (CI, $21,000 to $33,000) per QALY gained for age-targeted digital mammography to $84,500 (CI, $75,000 to $93,000) per QALY gained for age- and density-targeted digital mammography. In the Medicare population, the cost-effectiveness of density-targeted digital mammography screening varied from a base-case estimate of $97,000 (CI, $77,000 to $131,000) to $257,000 per QALY gained (CI, $91,000 to $536,000) in the alternative-case analyses, in which the sensitivity of film mammography was increased and the sensitivity of digital mammography in women with nondense breasts was decreased. Results were sensitive to the cost of digital mammography and to the prevalence of dense breasts. Results were dependent on model assumptions and DMIST findings. Relative to film mammography, screening for breast cancer by using all-digital mammography is not cost-effective. Age-targeted screening with digital mammography seems cost-effective, whereas density-targeted screening strategies are more costly and of uncertain value, particularly among women age 65 years or older.

Diagnostic accuracy of digital mammography in patients with dense breasts who underwent problem-solving mammography: effects of image processing and lesion type.

To determine effects of lesion type (calcification vs mass) and image processing on radiologist's performance for area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity for detection of masses and calcifications with digital mammography in women with mammographically dense breasts. This study included 201 women who underwent digital mammography at seven U.S. and Canadian medical centers. Three image-processing algorithms were applied to the digital images, which were acquired with Fischer, General Electric, and Lorad digital mammography units. Eighteen readers participated in the reader study (six readers per algorithm). Baseline values for reader performance with screen-film mammograms were obtained through the additional interpretation of 179 screen-film mammograms. A repeated-measures analysis of covariance allowing unequal slopes was used in each of the nine analyses (AUC, sensitivity, and specificity for each of three machines). Bonferroni correction was used. Although lesion type did not affect the AUC or sensitivity for Fischer digital images, it did affect specificity (P =.0004). For the General Electric digital images, AUC, sensitivity, and specificity were not affected by lesion type. For Lorad digital images, the results strongly suggested that lesion type affected AUC and sensitivity (P <.0001). None of the three image-processing methods tested affected the AUC, sensitivity, or specificity for the Fischer, General Electric, or Lorad digital images. Findings in this study indicate that radiologist's interpretation accuracy in interpreting digital mammograms depends on lesion type. Interpretation accuracy was not influenced by the image-processing method.