A CCTA-based strategy for low-to-intermediate-risk patients presenting with a possible acute coronary syndrome appears to allow the safe, expedited discharge from the emergency department of many patients who would otherwise be admitted. (Funded by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Health and the American College of Radiology Imaging Network Foundation; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00933400.).

Purpose To evaluate three coronary artery calcification (CAC) scoring methods to assess risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) death and all-cause mortality in National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) participants across levels of CAC scores. Materials and Methods The NLST was approved by the institutional review board at each participating institution, and informed consent was obtained from all participants. Image review was HIPAA compliant. Five cardiothoracic radiologists evaluated 1575 low-dose computed tomographic (CT) scans from three groups: 210 CHD deaths, 315 deaths not from CHD, and 1050 participants who were alive at conclusion of the trial. Radiologists used three scoring methods: overall visual assessment, segmented vessel-specific scoring, and Agatston scoring. Weighted Cox proportional hazards models were fit to evaluate the association between scoring methods and outcomes. Results In multivariate analysis of time to CHD death, Agatston scores of 1–100, 101–1000, and greater than 1000 (reference category 0) were associated with hazard ratios of 1.27 (95% confidence interval: 0.69, 2.53), 3.57 (95% confidence interval: 2.14, 7.48), and 6.63 (95% confidence interval: 3.57, 14.97), respectively; hazard ratios for summed segmented vessel-specific scores of 1–5, 6–11, and 12–30 (reference category 0) were 1.72 (95% confidence interval: 1.05, 3.34), 5.11 (95% confidence interval: 2.92, 10.94), and 6.10 (95% confidence interval: 3.19, 14.05), respectively; and hazard ratios for overall visual assessment of mild, moderate, or heavy (reference category none) were 2.09 (95% confidence interval: 1.30, 4.16), 3.86 (95% confidence interval: 2.02, 8.20), and 6.95 (95% confidence interval: 3.73, 15.67), respectively. Conclusion By using low-dose CT performed for lung cancer screening in older, heavy smokers, a simple visual assessment of CAC can be generated for risk assessment of CHD death and all-cause mortality, which is comparable to Agatston scoring and strongly associated with outcome.

Importance: Improved screening methods for women with dense breasts are needed because of their increased risk of breast cancer and of failed early diagnosis by screening mammography. Objective: To compare the screening performance of abbreviated breast MRI (AB-MR), and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in women with dense breasts. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cross-sectional study with longitudinal follow-up at 48 academic, community hospital, and private practice sites in the US and Germany, conducted between December 2016 and November 2017, that included average-risk women aged 40-75 years with heterogeneously dense or extremely dense breasts undergoing routine screening. Follow up ascertainment of cancer diagnoses was complete through September 12 th , 2019. Exposure: All women underwent screening by both DBT and AB-MR, performed in randomized order and read independently to avoid interpretation bias. Main outcome measures: The primary endpoint was the invasive cancer detection rate. Secondary outcomes included sensitivity, specificity, the additional-imaging-recommendation-rate, and positive predictive value (PPV) of biopsy, using invasive cancer and DCIS to define a positive reference standard. All outcomes are reported at the participant level. Pathology of core or surgical biopsy was the reference standard for cancer detection rate and PPV; interval cancers reported until the next annual screen were included in the reference standard for sensitivity and specificity. Results: Among 1516 enrolled women, 1444 (median age 54, range 40-75) completed both examinations and were included in the analysis. The reference standard was positive for invasive cancer with or without DCIS in 17 women, and for DCIS alone in another 6. No interval cancers were observed during follow-up. AB-MR detected all 17 women with invasive cancer, and 5/6 women with DCIS. DBT detected 7/17 women with invasive cancer, and 2/6 women with DCIS. The invasive-cancer-detection-rate was 11.8 per 1000 women [95% CI 7.4-18.8] for AB-MR versus 4.8 per 1000 women [95% CI 2.4-10.0] for DBT, a difference of 7 per 1000 women [95% CI for the difference 2.2-11.6] (exact McNemar p=0.002). For detection of invasive cancer and Comstock et al.