Comparison of Abbreviated Breast MRI vs Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Breast Cancer Detection Among Women With Dense Breasts Undergoing Screening

被引:327
作者
Comstock, Christopher E. [1 ]
Gatsonis, Constantine [2 ,3 ]
Newstead, Gillian M. [4 ,5 ]
Snyder, Bradley S. [3 ]
Gareen, Ilana F. [6 ]
Bergin, Jennifer T. [7 ]
Rahbar, Habib [8 ]
Sung, Janice S. [1 ]
Jacobs, Christina [9 ]
Harvey, Jennifer A. [10 ]
Nicholson, Mary H. [11 ]
Ward, Robert C. [12 ]
Holt, Jacqueline [13 ]
Prather, Andrew [14 ]
Miller, Kathy D. [15 ]
Schnall, Mitchell D. [16 ]
Kuhl, Christiane K. [17 ]
机构
[1] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10021 USA
[2] Brown Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Biostat, Providence, RI 02912 USA
[3] Brown Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Ctr Stat Sci, Providence, RI 02912 USA
[4] Univ Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
[5] Univ Rochester, Dept Radiol, Rochester, NY 14627 USA
[6] Brown Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol, Ctr Stat Sci, Providence, RI 02912 USA
[7] ProHlth Care, UW Canc Ctr, Waukesha, WI USA
[8] Fred Hutchinson Canc Res Ctr, 1124 Columbia St, Seattle, WA 98104 USA
[9] West Michigan Canc Ctr, Kalamazoo, MI USA
[10] Univ Virginia, Ctr Canc, Charlottesville, VA 22908 USA
[11] Community Hosp, Munster, IN USA
[12] Rhode Isl Hosp, Providence, RI USA
[13] Delaware Christiana Care NCORP, Newark, DE USA
[14] Gundersen Hlth Syst, La Crosse, WI USA
[15] Indiana Univ, Indianapolis, IN 46204 USA
[16] Univ Penn, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[17] Rhein Westfal TH Aachen, Univ Hosp, Aachen, Germany
来源
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION | 2020年 / 323卷 / 08期
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
RESONANCE-IMAGING MRI; TUMOR CHARACTERISTICS; MAMMOGRAPHIC DETECTION; BRCA2; MUTATION; RISK; ULTRASOUND; SURVEILLANCE; PERFORMANCE; INTENSITY; INTERVAL;
D O I
10.1001/jama.2020.0572
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Importance Improved screening methods for women with dense breasts are needed because of their increased risk of breast cancer and of failed early diagnosis by screening mammography. Objective To compare the screening performance of abbreviated breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in women with dense breasts. Design, Setting, and Participants Cross-sectional study with longitudinal follow-up at 48 academic, community hospital, and private practice sites in the United States and Germany, conducted between December 2016 and November 2017 among average-risk women aged 40 to 75 years with heterogeneously dense or extremely dense breasts undergoing routine screening. Follow-up ascertainment of cancer diagnoses was complete through September 12, 2019. Exposures All women underwent screening by both DBT and abbreviated breast MRI, performed in randomized order and read independently to avoid interpretation bias. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point was the invasive cancer detection rate. Secondary outcomes included sensitivity, specificity, additional imaging recommendation rate, and positive predictive value (PPV) of biopsy, using invasive cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) to define a positive reference standard. All outcomes are reported at the participant level. Pathology of core or surgical biopsy was the reference standard for cancer detection rate and PPV; interval cancers reported until the next annual screen were included in the reference standard for sensitivity and specificity. Results Among 1516 enrolled women, 1444 (median age, 54 [range, 40-75] years) completed both examinations and were included in the analysis. The reference standard was positive for invasive cancer with or without DCIS in 17 women and for DCIS alone in another 6. No interval cancers were observed during follow-up. Abbreviated breast MRI detected all 17 women with invasive cancer and 5 of 6 women with DCIS. Digital breast tomosynthesis detected 7 of 17 women with invasive cancer and 2 of 6 women with DCIS. The invasive cancer detection rate was 11.8 (95% CI, 7.4-18.8) per 1000 women for abbreviated breast MRI vs 4.8 (95% CI, 2.4-10.0) per 1000 women for DBT, a difference of 7 (95% CI, 2.2-11.6) per 1000 women (exact McNemar P = .002). For detection of invasive cancer and DCIS, sensitivity was 95.7% (95% CI, 79.0%-99.2%) with abbreviated breast MRI vs 39.1% (95% CI, 22.2%-59.2%) with DBT (P = .001) and specificity was 86.7% (95% CI, 84.8%-88.4%) vs 97.4% (95% CI, 96.5%-98.1%), respectively (P < .001). The additional imaging recommendation rate was 7.5% (95% CI, 6.2%-9.0%) with abbreviated breast MRI vs 10.1% (95% CI, 8.7%-11.8%) with DBT (P = .02) and the PPV was 19.6% (95% CI, 13.2%-28.2%) vs 31.0% (95% CI, 17.0%-49.7%), respectively (P = .15). Conclusions and Relevance Among women with dense breasts undergoing screening, abbreviated breast MRI, compared with DBT, was associated with a significantly higher rate of invasive breast cancer detection. Further research is needed to better understand the relationship between screening methods and clinical outcome.
引用
收藏
页码:746 / 756
页数:11
相关论文
共 40 条
  • [31] Cancer Screening in the United States, 2018: A Review of Current American Cancer Society Guidelines and Current Issues in Cancer Screening
    Smith, Robert A.
    Andrews, Kimberly S.
    Brooks, Durado
    Fedewa, Stacey A.
    Manassaram-Baptiste, Deana
    Saslow, Debbie
    Brawley, Otis W.
    Wender, Richard C.
    [J]. CA-A CANCER JOURNAL FOR CLINICIANS, 2018, 68 (04) : 297 - 316
  • [32] Benefits, Harms, and Cost-Effectiveness of Supplemental Ultrasonography Screening for Women With Dense Breasts
    Sprague, Brian L.
    Stout, Natasha K.
    Schechter, Clyde
    van Ravesteyn, Nicolien T.
    Cevik, Mucahit
    Alagoz, Oguzhan
    Lee, Christoph I.
    van den Broek, Jeroen J.
    Miglioretti, Diana L.
    Mandelblatt, Jeanne S.
    de Koning, Harry J.
    Kerlikowske, Karla
    Lehman, Constance D.
    Tosteson, Anna N. A.
    [J]. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2015, 162 (03) : 157 - U33
  • [33] Prevalence of Mammographically Dense Breasts in the United States
    Sprague, Brian L.
    Gangnon, Ronald E.
    Burt, Veronica
    Trentham-Dietz, Amy
    Hampton, John M.
    Wellman, Robert D.
    Kerlikowske, Karla
    Miglioretti, Diana L.
    [J]. JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2014, 106 (10):
  • [34] Breast Cancers Detected at Screening MR Imaging and Mammography in Patients at High Risk: Method of Detection Reflects Tumor Histopathologic Results
    Sung, Janice S.
    Stamler, Sarah
    Brooks, Jennifer
    Kaplan, Jennifer
    Huang, Tammy
    Dershaw, D. David
    Lee, Carol H.
    Morris, Elizabeth A.
    Comstock, Christopher E.
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2016, 280 (03) : 716 - 722
  • [35] Gadolinium Brain Deposition after Macrocyclic Gadolinium Administration: A Pediatric Case-Control Study
    Tibussek, Daniel
    Caspers, Christin Rademacher Julian
    Turowski, Bernd
    Schaper, Joerg
    Antoch, Gerald
    Klee, Dirk
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2017, 285 (01) : 223 - 230
  • [36] The Contributions of Breast Density and Common Genetic Variation to Breast Cancer Risk
    Vachon, Celine M.
    Pankratz, V. Shane
    Scott, Christopher G.
    Haeberle, Lothar
    Ziv, Elad
    Jensen, Matthew R.
    Brandt, Kathleen R.
    Whaley, Dana H.
    Olson, Janet E.
    Heusinger, Katharina
    Hack, Carolin C.
    Jud, Sebastian M.
    Beckmann, Matthias W.
    Schulz-Wendtland, Ruediger
    Tice, Jeffrey A.
    Norman, Aaron D.
    Cunningham, Julie M.
    Purrington, Kristen S.
    Easton, Douglas F.
    Sellers, Thomas A.
    Kerlikowske, Karla
    Fasching, Peter A.
    Couch, Fergus J.
    [J]. JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2015, 107 (05):
  • [37] Surveillance of Women with the BRCA1 or BRCA2 Mutation by Using Biannual Automated Breast US, MR Imaging, and Mammography
    van Zelst, Jan C. M.
    Mus, Roel D. M.
    Woldringh, Gwendolyn
    Rutten, Matthieu J. C. M.
    Bult, Peter
    Vreemann, Suzan
    de Jong, Mathijn
    Karssemeijer, Nico
    Hoogerbrugge, Nicoline
    Mann, Ritse M.
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2017, 285 (02) : 376 - 388
  • [38] Influence of Risk Category and Screening Round on the Performance of an MR Imaging and Mammography Screening Program in Carriers of the BRCA Mutation and Other Women at Increased Risk
    Vreemann, Suzan
    Gubern-Merida, Albert
    Schlooz-Vries, Margrethe S.
    Bult, Peter
    van Gils, Carla H.
    Hoogerbrugge, Nicoline
    Karssemeijer, Nico
    Mann, Ritse M.
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2018, 286 (02) : 443 - 451
  • [39] Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination
    Warner, E
    Plewes, DB
    Hill, KA
    Causer, PA
    Zubovits, JT
    Jong, RA
    Cutrara, MR
    DeBoer, G
    Yaffe, MJ
    Messner, SJ
    Meschino, WS
    Piron, CA
    Narod, SA
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2004, 292 (11): : 1317 - 1325
  • [40] Zackrisson S, 2018, LANCET ONCOL, V19, P1493, DOI [10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30521-7, 10.1016/s1470-2045(18)30521-7]