Skip to main content
Erschienen in: European Radiology 7/2017

07.11.2016 | Breast

Digital mammography screening: sensitivity of the programme dependent on breast density

verfasst von: Stefanie Weigel, W. Heindel, J. Heidrich, H.-W. Hense, O. Heidinger

Erschienen in: European Radiology | Ausgabe 7/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

To analyse the impact of breast density on the sensitivity of a population-based digital mammography screening programme (SP) as key evaluation parameter.

Methods

25,576 examinations were prospectively stratified from ACR category 1 to 4 for increments of 25 % density during independent double reading. SP was calculated as number of screen-detected cancers divided by the sum of screen-detected plus interval cancers (24-months period) per ACR category, related to the first reading (a), second reading (b) and highest stratification if discrepant (c). Chi-square tests were used for comparison.

Results

Overall sensitivity of the programme was 79.9 %. SP in ACR 4 (a: 50 %, b: 50 %, c: 50 %) was significantly lower than in ACR 3 (a: 72.9 %, b: 79.4 %, c: 80.7 %, p < 0.001), ACR 2 (a: 83.9 %, b: 85.7 %, c: 83.2 %, p < 0.001) and ACR 1 (a: 100 %, b: 88.8 %, c: 100 %; p < 0.001). Frequencies of ACR 4 were a: 5.0 %, b: 4.3 %, c: 6.9 %.

Conclusion

Digital mammography screening with independent double reading leads to a high overall SP. In the small group of women with breast density classified as ACR 4 SP is significantly reduced compared to all other ACR categories.

Key Points

Overall sensitivity of a population-based digital mammography screening programme (SP) was 79.9 %.
In women with ACR 1, 2, or 3, SP ranged between 72.9 %-100 %.
ACR 4 was rare in participants (<7 %) and SP was only 50 %.
SP in ACR 4 differed significantly from ACR 3 (p < 0.001).
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat American College of Radiology (2003) Breast imaging reporting and data system: BI-RADS atlas, 4th edn. American College of Radiology, Reston, VA American College of Radiology (2003) Breast imaging reporting and data system: BI-RADS atlas, 4th edn. American College of Radiology, Reston, VA
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Sickles EA, D’Orsi CJ, Bassett LW, et al (2013) ACR BI-RADS® Mammography. In: ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. American College of Radiology, Reston Sickles EA, D’Orsi CJ, Bassett LW, et al (2013) ACR BI-RADS® Mammography. In: ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. American College of Radiology, Reston
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Melnikow J, Fenton JJ, Whitlock EP et al (2016) Supplemental screening for breast cancer in women with dense breasts: a systematic review for the U.S. preventive services task force. Ann Intern Med 164:268–278CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Melnikow J, Fenton JJ, Whitlock EP et al (2016) Supplemental screening for breast cancer in women with dense breasts: a systematic review for the U.S. preventive services task force. Ann Intern Med 164:268–278CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Holm J, Humphreys K, Li J et al (2015) Risk factors and tumor characteristics of interval cancers by mammographic density. J Clin Oncol 33:1030–1037CrossRefPubMed Holm J, Humphreys K, Li J et al (2015) Risk factors and tumor characteristics of interval cancers by mammographic density. J Clin Oncol 33:1030–1037CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Perry NM, Broeders M, de Wolf C et al (2006) European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis, 4th edn. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg Perry NM, Broeders M, de Wolf C et al (2006) European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis, 4th edn. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Heidinger O, Batzler WU, Krieg V et al (2012) The incidence of interval cancers in the German mammography screening programme: results from the population-based cancer registry in North Rhine-Westphalia. Dtsch Arztebl Int 109:781–787PubMedPubMedCentral Heidinger O, Batzler WU, Krieg V et al (2012) The incidence of interval cancers in the German mammography screening programme: results from the population-based cancer registry in North Rhine-Westphalia. Dtsch Arztebl Int 109:781–787PubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Törnberg S, Kemetli L, Ascunce N et al (2010) A pooled analysis of interval cancer rates in six European countries. Eur J Cancer Prev 19:87–93CrossRefPubMed Törnberg S, Kemetli L, Ascunce N et al (2010) A pooled analysis of interval cancer rates in six European countries. Eur J Cancer Prev 19:87–93CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Wanders J, Holland K, Veldhuis W, et al (2015) Effect of volumetric mammographic density on performance of a breast cancer screening program using full-field digital mammography. In: European Congress of Radiology Wanders J, Holland K, Veldhuis W, et al (2015) Effect of volumetric mammographic density on performance of a breast cancer screening program using full-field digital mammography. In: European Congress of Radiology
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Holland K, van Zelst J, den Heeten GJ et al (2016) Consistency of breast density categories in serial screening mammograms: a comparison between automated and human assessment. Breast 29:49–54CrossRefPubMed Holland K, van Zelst J, den Heeten GJ et al (2016) Consistency of breast density categories in serial screening mammograms: a comparison between automated and human assessment. Breast 29:49–54CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Heidinger O, Heidrich J, Batzler WU et al (2015) Digital mammography screening in Germany: impact of age and histological subtype on program sensitivity. Breast 24:191–196CrossRefPubMed Heidinger O, Heidrich J, Batzler WU et al (2015) Digital mammography screening in Germany: impact of age and histological subtype on program sensitivity. Breast 24:191–196CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat McDonald ES, Oustimov A, Weinstein SP et al (2016) Effectiveness of digital breast tomosynthesis compared with digital mammography: outcomes analysis from 3 years of breast cancer screening. JAMA Oncol 2:737–743CrossRefPubMed McDonald ES, Oustimov A, Weinstein SP et al (2016) Effectiveness of digital breast tomosynthesis compared with digital mammography: outcomes analysis from 3 years of breast cancer screening. JAMA Oncol 2:737–743CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Freer PE (2015) Mammographic breast density: impact on breast cancer risk and implications for screening. Radiographics 35:302–315CrossRefPubMed Freer PE (2015) Mammographic breast density: impact on breast cancer risk and implications for screening. Radiographics 35:302–315CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB et al (2008) Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA 299:2151–2163CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB et al (2008) Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA 299:2151–2163CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Parris T, Wakefield D, Frimmer H (2013) Real world performance of screening breast ultrasound following enactment of Connecticut Bill 458. Breast J 19:64–70CrossRefPubMed Parris T, Wakefield D, Frimmer H (2013) Real world performance of screening breast ultrasound following enactment of Connecticut Bill 458. Breast J 19:64–70CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Kerlikowske K, Zhu W, Tosteson AN et al (2015) Identifying women with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med 162:673–681CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kerlikowske K, Zhu W, Tosteson AN et al (2015) Identifying women with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med 162:673–681CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Tagliafico AS, Calabrese M, Mariscotti G, et al (2016) Adjunct screening with tomosynthesis or ultrasound in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: interim report of a prospective comparative trial. J Clin Oncol Tagliafico AS, Calabrese M, Mariscotti G, et al (2016) Adjunct screening with tomosynthesis or ultrasound in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: interim report of a prospective comparative trial. J Clin Oncol
Metadaten
Titel
Digital mammography screening: sensitivity of the programme dependent on breast density
verfasst von
Stefanie Weigel
W. Heindel
J. Heidrich
H.-W. Hense
O. Heidinger
Publikationsdatum
07.11.2016
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
European Radiology / Ausgabe 7/2017
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4636-4

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2017

European Radiology 7/2017 Zur Ausgabe

Update Radiologie

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