Interval breast cancer characteristics before, during and after the transition from screen-film to full-field digital screening mammography

Objectives: Initial review of patients undergoing screening mammography imaged with a combination of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) plus full field digital mammography (FFDM) compared with FFDM alone. Materials and Methods: From June 2011 to December 2011, all patients presenting for routine screening mammography were offered a combination DBT plus FFDM exam. Under institutional review board approval, we reviewed 524 patients who opted for combination DBT plus FFDM and selected a sample group of 524 FFDM screening exams from the same time period for a comparative analysis. The χ2 (Chi-square) test was used to compare recall rates, breast density, personal history of breast cancer, and family history of breast cancer between the two groups. Results: Recall rate for FFDM, 11.45%, was significantly higher (P < 0001) than in the combination DBT plus FFDM group (4.20%). The biopsy rate in the FFDM group was 2.29% (12/524), with a cancer detection rate of 0.38% (2/524, or 3.8 per 1000) and positive predictive value (PPV) of 16.7% (2/12). The biopsy rate for the DBT plus FFDM group was 1.14% (n = 6/524), with a cancer detection rate 0.57% (n = 3/524, or 5.7 per 1000) and PPV of 50.0% (n = 3/6). Personal history of breast cancer in the FFDM group was significantly lower (P < 0.0001) than in the combination DBT plus FFDM group; 2.5% and 5.7%, respectively. A significant difference in family history of breast cancer (P < 0.0001) was found, with a higher rate in the combination DBT plus FFDM group (36.0% vs. 53.8%). There was a significant difference between the combination DBT plus FFDM group and FFDM alone group, when comparing breast density (P < 0.0147, 61.64% vs. 54.20% dense breasts, respectively) with a higher rate of dense breasts in the DBT plus FFDM group. In follow-up, one cancer was detected within one year of normal screening mammogram in the combination DBT plus FFDM group. Conclusion: Our initial experience found the recall rate in the combination DBT plus FFDM group was significantly lower than in the FFDM alone group, despite the fact that the combination DBT plus FFDM group had additional risk factors.

Download Full-text

Screening Mammography-Detected Cancers: The Sensitivity of the Computer-aided Detection System as Applied to Full-field Digital Mammography

Journal of the Korean Radiological Society ◽

10.3348/jkrs.2006.54.4.327 ◽

2006 ◽

Vol 54 (4) ◽

pp. 327

Author(s):

Sang Kyu Yang ◽

Nariya Cho ◽

Eun Sook Ko ◽

Do Yeon Kim ◽

Woo Kyung Moon

Keyword(s):

Digital Mammography ◽

Detection System ◽

Screening Mammography ◽

Computer Aided Detection ◽

Full Field ◽

Full Field Digital Mammography ◽

Computer Aided

Download Full-text

Faculty Opinions recommendation of Effect of screening mammography on breast-cancer mortality in Norway.

Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature ◽

10.3410/f.5324957.5337058 ◽

2010 ◽

Author(s):

Susan Davis

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Cancer Mortality ◽

Breast Cancer Mortality ◽

Screening Mammography

Download Full-text

Faculty Opinions recommendation of Accuracy and outcomes of screening mammography in women with a personal history of early-stage breast cancer.

Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature ◽

10.3410/f.8814959.9348058 ◽

2011 ◽

Author(s):

Gretchen Kimmick

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Early Stage ◽

Screening Mammography ◽

Personal History ◽

Early Stage Breast Cancer ◽

History Of

Download Full-text

Upgrade rates and outcomes of screen-detected atypical intraductal epithelial proliferation (AIDEP) diagnosed on core needle biopsy

Breast Disease ◽

10.3233/bd-201031 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-6

Author(s):

Emma C. Dunne ◽

Edel M. Quinn ◽

Maurice Stokes ◽

John M. Barry ◽

Malcolm Kell ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Core Needle Biopsy ◽

Needle Biopsy ◽

Demographic Data ◽

Screening Mammography ◽

Published Data ◽

Epithelial Proliferation ◽

Core Needle ◽

In Situ Carcinoma ◽

Increased Risk

INTRODUCTION: Atypical intraductal epithelial proliferation (AIDEP) is a breast lesion categorised as “indeterminate” if identified on core needle biopsy (CNB). The rate at which these lesions are upgraded following diagnostic excision varies in the literature. Women diagnosed with AIDEP are thought to be at increased risk of breast cancer. Our aim was to identify the rate of upgrade to invasive or in situ carcinoma in a group of patients diagnosed with AIDEP on screening mammography and to quantify their risk of subsequent breast cancer. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database containing all patients diagnosed with AIDEP on CNB between 2005 and 2012 in an Irish breast screening centre. Basic demographic data was collected along with details of the original CNB result, rate of upgrade to carcinoma and details of any subsequent cancer diagnoses. RESULTS: In total 113 patients were diagnosed with AIDEP on CNB during the study period. The upgrade rate on diagnostic excision was 28.3% (n = 32). 6.2% (n = 7) were upgraded to invasive cancer and 22.1% (n = 25) to DCIS. 81 patients were not upgraded on diagnostic excision and were offered 5 years of annual mammographic surveillance. 9.88% (8/81) of these patients went on to receive a subsequent diagnosis of malignancy. The mean time to diagnosis of these subsequent cancers was 65.41 months (range 20.18–145.21). CONCLUSION: Our data showing an upgrade rate of 28% to carcinoma reflects recently published data and we believe it supports the continued practice of excising AIDEP to exclude co-existing carcinoma.

Download Full-text