Prospective study aiming to compare 2D mammography and tomosynthesis + synthesized mammography in terms of cancer detection and recall. From double reading of 2D mammography to single reading of tomosynthesis

Martín, Sara Romero; Povedano, J. L. Raya; García, M. Cara; Romero, Ana Luz Santos; Garriguet, Margarita Pedrosa; Benito, Marina Álvarez

doi:10.1007/s00330-017-5219-8

Cited by 33 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Results have shown that cancer detection rate was significantly higher in patients screened with DBT&SM versus DM alone in the Verona Screening Programme too 109. Similar conclusions were drawn in other studies 102,103,105…”

Section: Results: Studies On the Optimal Use Of Digital Breast Tomosysupporting

confidence: 86%

“…Early studies on Hologic SM have found similar recall rates for DM&DBT, DBT&SM,95,99 as well as DM and SM alone 99. Later studies, with a high number of participants (9672 and 15,571 respectively) have also shown an at least equivalent recall rate100–103 in DBT&SM versus DM&DBT, if not higher 104. Significant differences in false positive recall rate when using DM alone versus DBT&SM, were found 100…”

Section: Results: Studies On the Optimal Use Of Digital Breast Tomosymentioning

confidence: 88%

See 1 more Smart Citation

<p>The role of digital breast tomosynthesis in breast cancer screening: a manufacturer- and metrics-specific analysis</p>

Hadjipanteli

Kontos

Constantinidou

2019

CMAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT), with or without Digital Mammography (DM) or Synthetic Mammography (SM), has been introduced or is under consideration for its introduction in breast cancer screening in several countries, as it has been shown that it has advantages over DM. Despite this there is no agreement on how to implement DBT in screening, and in many cases there is a lack of official guidance on the optimum usage of each commercially available system. The aim of this review is to carry out a manufacturerspecific summary of studies on the implementation of DBT in breast cancer screening. Methods: An exhaustive literature review was undertaken to identify clinical observer studies that evaluated at least one of five common metrics: sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) analysis, recall rate and cancer detection rate. Four common DBT implementation methods were discussed in this review: (1) DBT, (2) DM with DBT, (3) 1-view DBT with or without 1-view DM or 2-view DM and (4) DBT with SM. Results: A summary of 89 studies, selected from a database of 677 studies, on the assessment of the implementation of DBT in breast cancer screening is presented in tables and discussed in a manufacturer-and metric-specific approach. Much more studies were carried out using some DBT systems than others. For one implementation method of DBT by one manufacturer there is a shortage of studies, for another implementation there are conflicting results. In some cases, there is a strong agreement between studies, making the advantages and disadvantages of each system clear. Conclusion: The optimum implementation method of DBT in breast screening, in terms of diagnostic benefit and patient radiation dose, for one manufacturer does not necessarily apply to other manufacturers.

show abstract

Section: Results: Studies On the Optimal Use Of Digital Breast Tomosysupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Results: Studies On the Optimal Use Of Digital Breast Tomosymentioning

confidence: 88%

<p>The role of digital breast tomosynthesis in breast cancer screening: a manufacturer- and metrics-specific analysis</p>

Hadjipanteli

Kontos

Constantinidou

2019

CMAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After completely reading these references, 18 studies (comprising 26 articles, since some had more than one published article) met our eligibility criteria and therefore were included in this review [4][5][6][7][8][24][25][26][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49] .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These studies included: one RCT 24 , five accuracy studies 7,34,35,40,44 , and eight retrospective cohort studies [4][5][6]8,[36][37][38]46 . Six studies, three accuracy studies 35,43,48 , one prospective cohort study 47 , one RCT 25 and one quasi-RCT 26 evaluated the effectiveness of DBT with synthetic mammography versus digital mammography alone.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy and Effectiveness of Mammography versus Mammography and Tomosynthesis for Population-Based Breast Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Giampietro

Cabral

Lima

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We proposed to compare the accuracy and effectiveness of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), plus digital or synthetic mammography, with digital mammography alone in women attending populationbased breast cancer screenings. We performed a systematic review and included controlled studies comparing DBT with digital mammography for breast cancer screening. Search strategies were applied to the MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and CENTRAL databases. With moderate quality of evidence, in 1,000 screens, DBT plus digital mammography increased the overall and invasive breast cancer rates by 3 and 2 (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.58 and RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.79, respectively). DBT plus synthetic mammography increased both overall and invasive breast cancer rates by 2 (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.54 and RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.55, respectively). DBT did not improve recall, false positive and false negative rates. However due to heterogeneity the quality of evidence was low. For women attending population-based breast cancer screenings, DBT increases rates of overall and invasive breast cancer. There is no evidence with high or moderate quality showing that DBT compared with digital mammography decreases recall rates, as well as false positive and false negative rates.

show abstract

“…Specifically, let’s consider the scenario of replacing digital mammography as the screening imaging modality for a higher-performing technique, e.g., digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT). Over a number of prospective screening trials, DBT has been found to result in higher detection performance, but with a doubling of the reading time [ [21] , [22] , [23] , [24] , [25] , [26] , [27] , [28] , [29] ]. Therefore, introduction of DBT-based screening, which has already taken place in the US, where screening is institution-based [ 30 ], is also of intense interest in countries where screening is regional- or national-program based.…”

Section: Achieving Stand-alone Computer Interpretation: When Is It Fementioning

confidence: 99%

Stand-alone artificial intelligence - The future of breast cancer screening?

Sechopoulos

Mann

2020

The Breast

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although computers have had a role in interpretation of mammograms for at least two decades, their impact on performance has not lived up to expectations. However, in the last five years, the field of medical image analysis has undergone a revolution due to the introduction of deep learning convolutional neural networks – a form of artificial intelligence (AI). Because of their considerably higher performance compared to conventional computer aided detection methods, these AI algorithms have resulted in renewed interest in their potential for interpreting breast images in stand-alone mode. For this, first the actual capability of the algorithms, compared to breast radiologists, needs to be well understood. Although early studies have pointed to the comparable performance between AI systems and breast radiologists in interpreting mammograms, these comparisons have been performed in laboratory conditions with limited, enriched datasets. AI algorithms with performance comparable to breast radiologists could be used in a number of different ways, the most impactful being pre-selection, or triaging, of normal screening mammograms that would not need human interpretation. Initial studies evaluating this proposed use have shown very promising results, with the resulting accuracy of the complete screening process not being affected, but with a significant reduction in workload. There is a need to perform additional studies, especially prospective ones, with large screening data sets, to both gauge the actual stand-alone performance of these new algorithms, and the impact of the different implementation possibilities on screening programs.

show abstract

Prospective study aiming to compare 2D mammography and tomosynthesis + synthesized mammography in terms of cancer detection and recall. From double reading of 2D mammography to single reading of tomosynthesis

Abstract: • Tomosynthesis increases cancer detection and decreases recall rates versus 2D mammography. • Synthesized-mammography avoids performing 2D, showing higher cancer detection. • Single reading of tomosynthesis + synthesized is feasible as a new practice.

Cited by 33 publications

References 16 publications

<p>The role of digital breast tomosynthesis in breast cancer screening: a manufacturer- and metrics-specific analysis</p>

<p>The role of digital breast tomosynthesis in breast cancer screening: a manufacturer- and metrics-specific analysis</p>

Accuracy and Effectiveness of Mammography versus Mammography and Tomosynthesis for Population-Based Breast Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Stand-alone artificial intelligence - The future of breast cancer screening?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About