Two-year follow-up of participants in the BreastScreen Victoria pilot trial of tomosynthesis versus mammography: breast density-stratified screening outcomes

Author:

Houssami Nehmat12,Lockie Darren3,Giles Michelle3,Noguchi Naomi2,Marr Georgina4,Marinovich M Luke12

Affiliation:

1. The Daffodil Centre, the University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia

2. Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine & Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

3. Maroondah BreastScreen, Eastern Health, Victoria, Australia

4. BreastScreen Victoria, Victoria, Australia

Abstract

Objective: This follow-up study of BreastScreen Victoria’s pilot trial of digital breast tomosynthesis aimed to report interval cancer rates, screening sensitivity, and density-stratified outcomes for tomosynthesis vs mammography screening. Methods: Prospective pilot trial [ACTRN-12617000947303] in Maroondah BreastScreen recruited females ≥ 40 years presenting for screening (August 2017–November 2018) to DBT; concurrent screening participants who received mammography formed a comparison group. Follow-up of 24 months from screen date was used to ascertain interval cancers; automated breast density was measured. Results: There were 48 screen-detected and 9 interval cancers amongst 4908 tomosynthesis screens, and 34 screen-detected and 16 interval cancers amongst 5153 mammography screens. Interval cancer rate was 1.8/1000 (95%CI 0.8–3.5) for tomosynthesis vs 3.1/1000 (95%CI 1.8–5.0) for mammography (p = 0.20). Sensitivity of tomosynthesis (86.0%; 95% CI 74.2–93.7) was significantly higher than mammography (68.0%; 95% CI 53.3–80.5), p = 0.03. Cancer detection rate (CDR) of 9.8/1000 (95%CI 7.2–12.9) for tomosynthesis was higher than that of 6.6/1000 (95%CI 4.6–9.2) for mammography (p = 0.08); density-stratified analyses showed CDR was significantly higher for tomosynthesis than mammography (10.6/1000 vs 3.5/1000, p = 0.03) in high-density screens. Recall rate for tomosynthesis was significantly higher than for mammography (4.2% vs  3.0%, p < 0.001), and this increase in recall for tomosynthesis was evident only in high-density screens (5.6% vs  2.9%, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Although interval cancer rates did not significantly differ between screened groups, sensitivity was significantly higher for tomosynthesis than mammography screening. Advances in knowledge: In a program-embedded pilot trial, both increased cancer detection and recall rates from tomosynthesis were predominantly observed in high-density screens.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3