Skip to main content
Erschienen in: European Radiology 10/2011

01.10.2011 | Breast

Effect of radiologist experience on the risk of false-positive results in breast cancer screening programs

verfasst von: Raquel Zubizarreta Alberdi, Ana B. Fernández Llanes, Raquel Almazán Ortega, Rubén Roman Expósito, Jose M. Velarde Collado, Teresa Queiro Verdes, Carmen Natal Ramos, María Ederra Sanz, Dolores Salas Trejo, Xavier Castells Oliveres, and the CFPR (Cumulative False Positive Risk) group(1)

Erschienen in: European Radiology | Ausgabe 10/2011

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the effect of radiologist experience on the risk of false-positive results in population-based breast cancer screening programmes.

Methods

We evaluated 1,440,384 single-read screening mammograms, corresponding to 471,112 women aged 45–69 years participating in four Spanish programmes between 1990 and 2006. The mammograms were interpreted by 72 radiologists.

Results

The overall percentage of false-positive results was 5.85% and that for false-positives resulting in an invasive procedure was 0.38%. Both the risk of false-positives overall and of false-positives leading to an invasive procedure significantly decreased (p < 0.001) with greater reading volume in the previous year: OR 0.77 and OR 0.78, respectively, for a reading volume 500–1,999 mammograms and OR 0.59 and OR 0.60 for a reading volume of >14,999 mammograms with respect to the reference category (<500). The risk of both categories of false-positives was also significantly reduced (p < 0.001) as radiologists’ years of experience increased: OR 0.96 and OR 0.84, respectively, for 1 year’s experience and OR 0.72 and OR 0.73, respectively, for more than 4 years’ experience with regard to the category of <1 year’s experience.

Conclusion

Radiologist experience is a determining factor in the risk of a false-positive result in breast cancer screening.
Literatur
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Nystrom L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, Frisell J, Nordenskjold B, Rutqvist LE (2002) Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet 359:909–919PubMedCrossRef Nystrom L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, Frisell J, Nordenskjold B, Rutqvist LE (2002) Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet 359:909–919PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Elmore JG, Barton MB, Moceri VM, Polk S, Arena PJ, Fletcher SW (1998) Ten-year risk of false positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations. N Engl J Med 338:1089–1096PubMedCrossRef Elmore JG, Barton MB, Moceri VM, Polk S, Arena PJ, Fletcher SW (1998) Ten-year risk of false positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations. N Engl J Med 338:1089–1096PubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Hofvind S, Thoresen S, Tretli S (2004) The cumulative risk of a false-positive recall in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program. Cancer 101:1501–1507PubMedCrossRef Hofvind S, Thoresen S, Tretli S (2004) The cumulative risk of a false-positive recall in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program. Cancer 101:1501–1507PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Council of the European Union (2003) Council Recommendation of 2 December 2003 on Cancer Screening (2003/878/EC) Off J Eur Union. 16 Dic 327:34–38 Council of the European Union (2003) Council Recommendation of 2 December 2003 on Cancer Screening (2003/878/EC) Off J Eur Union. 16 Dic 327:34–38
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, Sickles EA, Ernster V (1996) Effect of age, breast density, and family history on the sensitivity of first screening mammography. JAMA 276:33–38PubMedCrossRef Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, Sickles EA, Ernster V (1996) Effect of age, breast density, and family history on the sensitivity of first screening mammography. JAMA 276:33–38PubMedCrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC et al (2003) Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med 138:168–175PubMed Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC et al (2003) Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med 138:168–175PubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Lehman CD, White E, Peacock S, Drucker MJ, Urban N (1999) Effect of age and breast density on screening mammograms with false-positive findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 173:1651–1655PubMed Lehman CD, White E, Peacock S, Drucker MJ, Urban N (1999) Effect of age and breast density on screening mammograms with false-positive findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 173:1651–1655PubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Taplin S, Abraham L, Barlow WE et al (2008) Mammography facility characteristics associated with interpretive accuracy of screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:876–887PubMedCrossRef Taplin S, Abraham L, Barlow WE et al (2008) Mammography facility characteristics associated with interpretive accuracy of screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:876–887PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Smith-Bindman R, Chu P, Miglioretti DL et al (2005) Physician predictors of mammographic accuracy. J Natl Cancer Inst 97:358–367PubMedCrossRef Smith-Bindman R, Chu P, Miglioretti DL et al (2005) Physician predictors of mammographic accuracy. J Natl Cancer Inst 97:358–367PubMedCrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Kan L, Olivotto IA, Warren Burhenne LJ, Sickles EA, Coldman AJ (2000) Standardized abnormal interpretation and cancer detection ratios to assess reading volume and reader performance in a breast screening program. Radiology 215:563–567PubMed Kan L, Olivotto IA, Warren Burhenne LJ, Sickles EA, Coldman AJ (2000) Standardized abnormal interpretation and cancer detection ratios to assess reading volume and reader performance in a breast screening program. Radiology 215:563–567PubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Esserman L, Cowley H, Eberle C et al (2002) Improving the accuracy of mammography: volume and outcome relationships. J Natl Cancer Inst 94:369–375PubMed Esserman L, Cowley H, Eberle C et al (2002) Improving the accuracy of mammography: volume and outcome relationships. J Natl Cancer Inst 94:369–375PubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Barlow WE, Chi C, Carney PA et al (2004) Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists. J Natl Cancer Inst 96:1840–1850PubMedCrossRef Barlow WE, Chi C, Carney PA et al (2004) Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists. J Natl Cancer Inst 96:1840–1850PubMedCrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Beam CA, Conant EF, Sickles EA (2003) Association of volume and volume-independent factors with accuracy in screening mammogram interpretation. J Natl Cancer Inst 95:282–290PubMedCrossRef Beam CA, Conant EF, Sickles EA (2003) Association of volume and volume-independent factors with accuracy in screening mammogram interpretation. J Natl Cancer Inst 95:282–290PubMedCrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Molins E, Macia F, Ferrer F, Maristany MT, Castells X (2008) Association between radiologists’ experience and accuracy in interpreting screening mammograms. BMC Health Serv Res 8:91PubMedCrossRef Molins E, Macia F, Ferrer F, Maristany MT, Castells X (2008) Association between radiologists’ experience and accuracy in interpreting screening mammograms. BMC Health Serv Res 8:91PubMedCrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat European Commission (2006) European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis, 4th edn. In: Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, Törnberg S, Holland R, von Karsa L, et al. (eds) Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg European Commission (2006) European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis, 4th edn. In: Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, Törnberg S, Holland R, von Karsa L, et al. (eds) Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Woodard DB, Gelfand AE, Barlow WE, Elmore JG (2007) Performance assessment for radiologists interpreting screening mammography. Stat Med 26:1532–1551PubMedCrossRef Woodard DB, Gelfand AE, Barlow WE, Elmore JG (2007) Performance assessment for radiologists interpreting screening mammography. Stat Med 26:1532–1551PubMedCrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Elmore JG, Miglioretti DL, Reisch LM et al (2002) Screening mammograms by community radiologists: variability in false-positive rates. J Natl Cancer Inst 94:1373–1380PubMed Elmore JG, Miglioretti DL, Reisch LM et al (2002) Screening mammograms by community radiologists: variability in false-positive rates. J Natl Cancer Inst 94:1373–1380PubMed
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Miglioretti DL, Smith-Bindman R, Abraham L et al (2007) Radiologist characteristics associated with interpretive performance of diagnostic mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 19(99):1854–1863 Miglioretti DL, Smith-Bindman R, Abraham L et al (2007) Radiologist characteristics associated with interpretive performance of diagnostic mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 19(99):1854–1863
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Tan A, Freeman DH Jr, Goodwin JS, Freeman JL (2006) Variation in false-positive rates of mammography reading among 1067 radiologists: a population-based assessment. Breast Cancer Res Treat 100:309–318PubMedCrossRef Tan A, Freeman DH Jr, Goodwin JS, Freeman JL (2006) Variation in false-positive rates of mammography reading among 1067 radiologists: a population-based assessment. Breast Cancer Res Treat 100:309–318PubMedCrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Castells X, Molins E, Macia F (2006) Cumulative false positive recall rate and association with participant related factors in a population based breast cancer screening programme. J Epidemiol Community Health 60:316–321PubMedCrossRef Castells X, Molins E, Macia F (2006) Cumulative false positive recall rate and association with participant related factors in a population based breast cancer screening programme. J Epidemiol Community Health 60:316–321PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Effect of radiologist experience on the risk of false-positive results in breast cancer screening programs
verfasst von
Raquel Zubizarreta Alberdi
Ana B. Fernández Llanes
Raquel Almazán Ortega
Rubén Roman Expósito
Jose M. Velarde Collado
Teresa Queiro Verdes
Carmen Natal Ramos
María Ederra Sanz
Dolores Salas Trejo
Xavier Castells Oliveres
and the CFPR (Cumulative False Positive Risk) group(1)
Publikationsdatum
01.10.2011
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
European Radiology / Ausgabe 10/2011
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2160-0

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 10/2011

European Radiology 10/2011 Zur Ausgabe

Endlich: Zi zeigt, mit welchen PVS Praxen zufrieden sind

IT für Ärzte Nachrichten

Darauf haben viele Praxen gewartet: Das Zi hat eine Liste von Praxisverwaltungssystemen veröffentlicht, die von Nutzern positiv bewertet werden. Eine gute Grundlage für wechselwillige Ärzte und Psychotherapeuten.

Akuter Schwindel: Wann lohnt sich eine MRT?

28.04.2024 Schwindel Nachrichten

Akuter Schwindel stellt oft eine diagnostische Herausforderung dar. Wie nützlich dabei eine MRT ist, hat eine Studie aus Finnland untersucht. Immerhin einer von sechs Patienten wurde mit akutem ischämischem Schlaganfall diagnostiziert.

Screening-Mammografie offenbart erhöhtes Herz-Kreislauf-Risiko

26.04.2024 Mammografie Nachrichten

Routinemäßige Mammografien helfen, Brustkrebs frühzeitig zu erkennen. Anhand der Röntgenuntersuchung lassen sich aber auch kardiovaskuläre Risikopatientinnen identifizieren. Als zuverlässiger Anhaltspunkt gilt die Verkalkung der Brustarterien.

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

23.04.2024 Pankreaskarzinom Nachrichten

Die Empfehlungen zur Therapie des Pankreaskarzinoms wurden um zwei Off-Label-Anwendungen erweitert. Und auch im Bereich der Früherkennung gibt es Aktualisierungen.

Update Radiologie

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