Skip to main content
Erschienen in: European Radiology 12/2018

30.05.2018 | Breast

Can digital breast tomosynthesis perform better than standard digital mammography work-up in breast cancer assessment clinic?

verfasst von: S. Mall, J. Noakes, M. Kossoff, W. Lee, M. McKessar, A. Goy, J. Duncombe, M. Roberts, B. Giuffre, A. Miller, N. Bhola, C. Kapoor, C. Shearman, G. DaCosta, S. Choi, J. Sterba, M. Kay, K. Bruderlin, N. Winarta, K. Donohue, B. Macdonell-Scott, F. Klijnsma, K. Suzuki, P. Brennan, C. Mello-Thoms

Erschienen in: European Radiology | Ausgabe 12/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the efficacy of use of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) with standard digital mammography (DM) workup views in the breast cancer assessment clinic.

Materials and methods

The Tomosynthesis Assessment Clinic trial (TACT), conducted between 16 October 2014 and 19 April 2016, is an ethics-approved, monocenter, multireader, multicase split-plot reading study. After written informed consent was obtained, 144 females (age > 40 years) who were recalled to the assessment clinic were recruited into TACT. These cases (48 cancers) were randomly allocated for blinded review of (1) DM workup and (2) DBT, both in conjunction with previous DM from the screening examination. Fifteen radiologists of varying experience levels in the Australia BreastScreen Program were included in this study, wherein each radiologist read 48 cases (16 cancers) in 3 non-overlapping blocks. Diagnostic accuracy was measured by means of sensitivity, specificity, and positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV). The receiver-operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) was calculated to determine radiologists’ performances.

Results

Use of DBT (AUC = 0.927) led to improved performance of the radiologists (z = 2.62, p = 0.008) compared with mammography workup (AUC = 0.872). Similarly, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of DBT (0.93, 0.75, 0.64, 0.96) were higher than those of the workup (0.90, 0.56, 0.49, 0.92). Most radiologists (80%) performed better with DBT than standard workup. Cancerous lesions on DBT appeared more severe (U = 33,172, p = 0.02) and conspicuous (U = 24,207, p = 0.02). There was a significant reduction in the need for additional views (χ2 = 17.63, p < 0.001) and recommendations for ultrasound (χ2 = 8.56, p = 0.003) with DBT.

Conclusions

DBT has the potential to increase diagnostic accuracy and simplify the assessment process in the breast cancer assessment clinic.

Key Points

Use of DBT in the assessment clinic results in increased diagnostic accuracy.
Use of DBT in the assessment clinic improves performance of radiologists and also increases the confidence in their decisions.
DBT may reduce the need for additional views, ultrasound imaging, and biopsy.
Literatur
3.
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Kopans DB (2007) Breast Imaging. 3rd ed: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Kopans DB (2007) Breast Imaging. 3rd ed: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Chae EY, Kim HH, Cha JH, Shin HJ, Choi WJ (2016) Detection and characterization of breast lesions in a selective diagnostic population: diagnostic accuracy study for comparison between one-view digital breast tomosynthesis and two-view full-field digital mammography. Br J Radiol 89(1062):8. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20150743 CrossRef Chae EY, Kim HH, Cha JH, Shin HJ, Choi WJ (2016) Detection and characterization of breast lesions in a selective diagnostic population: diagnostic accuracy study for comparison between one-view digital breast tomosynthesis and two-view full-field digital mammography. Br J Radiol 89(1062):8. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1259/​bjr.​20150743 CrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Alakhras M, Mello-Thoms C, Rickard M, Bourne R, Brennan PC editors (2014) Efficacy of digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer diagnosis. Proc SPIE 9037, Medical Imaging 2014: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, 90370V (March 11, 2014) Alakhras M, Mello-Thoms C, Rickard M, Bourne R, Brennan PC editors (2014) Efficacy of digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer diagnosis. Proc SPIE 9037, Medical Imaging 2014: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, 90370V (March 11, 2014)
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Whelehan P, Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Vinnicombe SJ et al (2017) Clinical performance of Siemens digital breast tomosynthesis versus standard supplementary mammography for the assessment of screen-detected soft-tissue abnormalities: a multi-reader study. Clin Radiol 72(1). doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2016.08.011CrossRef Whelehan P, Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Vinnicombe SJ et al (2017) Clinical performance of Siemens digital breast tomosynthesis versus standard supplementary mammography for the assessment of screen-detected soft-tissue abnormalities: a multi-reader study. Clin Radiol 72(1). doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2016.08.011CrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Mall S, Brennan PC, Mello-Thoms C (2015) Implementation and value of using a split-plot reader design in a study of digital breast tomosynthesis in a breast cancer assessment clinic. In: SPIE 9416, Medical Imaging 2015: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, 941619, 17 March 2015. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2083152 Mall S, Brennan PC, Mello-Thoms C (2015) Implementation and value of using a split-plot reader design in a study of digital breast tomosynthesis in a breast cancer assessment clinic. In: SPIE 9416, Medical Imaging 2015: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, 941619, 17 March 2015. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1117/​12.​2083152
18.
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Mhuircheartaigh NN, Coffey L, Fleming H, Doherty A, McNally S (2017) With the advent of tomosynthesis in the workup of mammographic abnormality, is spot compression mammography now obsolete? An initial clinical experience. Breast J 23(5):509–518. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12787 CrossRef Mhuircheartaigh NN, Coffey L, Fleming H, Doherty A, McNally S (2017) With the advent of tomosynthesis in the workup of mammographic abnormality, is spot compression mammography now obsolete? An initial clinical experience. Breast J 23(5):509–518. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​tbj.​12787 CrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Svahn T, Andersson I, Chakraborty D et al (2010) The diagnostic accuracy of dual-view digital mammography, single-view breast tomosynthesis and a dual-view combination of breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography in a free-response observer performance study. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 139(1-3):113–117. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncq044 CrossRef Svahn T, Andersson I, Chakraborty D et al (2010) The diagnostic accuracy of dual-view digital mammography, single-view breast tomosynthesis and a dual-view combination of breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography in a free-response observer performance study. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 139(1-3):113–117. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1093/​rpd/​ncq044 CrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Clark G, Valencia A (2015) Does tomosynthesis increase confidence in grading the suspicious appearance of a lesion? An audit of cancers diagnosed in the assessment clinic using tomosynthesis: initial experience at Avon Breast Screening Unit. Breast Cancer Res 17:2CrossRef Clark G, Valencia A (2015) Does tomosynthesis increase confidence in grading the suspicious appearance of a lesion? An audit of cancers diagnosed in the assessment clinic using tomosynthesis: initial experience at Avon Breast Screening Unit. Breast Cancer Res 17:2CrossRef
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Philpotts L, Kalra, V, Crenshaw, J, Butler, R (2013) How tomosynthesis optimizes patient work up, throughput, and resource utilization. Radiological Society of North America 2013 Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting; December 1 - December 6; Chicago Philpotts L, Kalra, V, Crenshaw, J, Butler, R (2013) How tomosynthesis optimizes patient work up, throughput, and resource utilization. Radiological Society of North America 2013 Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting; December 1 - December 6; Chicago
Metadaten
Titel
Can digital breast tomosynthesis perform better than standard digital mammography work-up in breast cancer assessment clinic?
verfasst von
S. Mall
J. Noakes
M. Kossoff
W. Lee
M. McKessar
A. Goy
J. Duncombe
M. Roberts
B. Giuffre
A. Miller
N. Bhola
C. Kapoor
C. Shearman
G. DaCosta
S. Choi
J. Sterba
M. Kay
K. Bruderlin
N. Winarta
K. Donohue
B. Macdonell-Scott
F. Klijnsma
K. Suzuki
P. Brennan
C. Mello-Thoms
Publikationsdatum
30.05.2018
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
European Radiology / Ausgabe 12/2018
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5473-4

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 12/2018

European Radiology 12/2018 Zur Ausgabe

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.