Tumor Characteristics and Molecular Subtypes in Breast Cancer Screening with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: The Malmo Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial

被引:31
|
作者
Johnson, Kristin [1 ]
Zackrisson, Sophia [1 ]
Rosso, Aldana [1 ]
Sartor, Hanna [1 ]
Saal, Lao H. [2 ]
Andersson, Ingvar [1 ]
Lang, Kristina [1 ]
机构
[1] Lund Univ, Skane Univ Hosp, Dept Translat Med, Diagnost Radiol, Inga Marie Nilssons Gata 49, S-20502 Malmo, Sweden
[2] Lund Univ, Dept Clin Sci Lund, Div Oncol & Pathol, Translat Oncogen Unit, Lund, Sweden
基金
瑞典研究理事会;
关键词
MAMMOGRAPHY; GRADE; WOMEN;
D O I
10.1148/radiol.2019190132
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Background: Screening accuracy can be improved with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT). To further evaluate DBT in screening, it is important to assess the molecular subtypes of the detected cancers. Purpose: To describe tumor characteristics, including molecular subtypes, of cancers detected at DBT compared with those detected at digital mammography (DM) in breast cancer screening. Materials and Methods: The Malmo Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial is a prospective, population-based screening trial comparing one-view DBT with two-view DM. Tumor characteristics were obtained, and invasive cancers were classified according to St Gallen as follows: luminal A-like, luminal B-like human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER)2-negative/HER2-positive, HER2-positive, and triple-negative cancers. Tumor characteristics were compared by mode of detection: DBT alone or DM (ie, DBT and DM or DM alone). chi(2) test was used for data analysis. Results: Between January 2010 and February 2015, 14 848 women were enrolled (mean age, 57 years +/- 10; age range, 40-76 years). In total, 139 cancers were detected; 118 cancers were invasive and 21 were ductal carcinomas in situ. Thirty-seven additional invasive cancers (36 cancers with complete subtypes and stage) were detected at DBT alone, and 81 cancers (80 cancers with complete stage) were detected at DM. No differences were seen between DBT and DM in the distribution of tumor size 20 mm or smaller (86% [31 of 36] vs 85% [68 of 80], respectively; P = .88), node-negative status (75% [27 of 36] vs 74% [59 of 80], respectively; P = .89), or luminal A-like subtype (53% [19 of 36] vs 46% [37 of 81], respectively; P = .48). Conclusion: The biologic profile of the additional cancers detected at digital breast tomosynthesis in a large prospective population-based screening trial was similar to those detected at digital mammography, and the majority were early-stage luminal A-like cancers. This indicates that digital breast tomosynthesis screening does not alter the predictive and prognostic profile of screening-detected cancers. (C) RSNA, 2019
引用
收藏
页码:273 / 281
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Breast cancer screening using digital breast tomosynthesis compared to digital mammography alone for Japanese women
    Kanako Ban
    Hiroko Tsunoda
    Seiko Togashi
    Yuko Kawaguchi
    Takanobu Sato
    Yoko Takahashi
    Yoshitaka Nagatsuka
    Breast Cancer, 2021, 28 : 459 - 464
  • [42] Breast cancer screening using digital breast tomosynthesis compared to digital mammography alone for Japanese women
    Ban, Kanako
    Tsunoda, Hiroko
    Togashi, Seiko
    Kawaguchi, Yuko
    Sato, Takanobu
    Takahashi, Yoko
    Nagatsuka, Yoshitaka
    BREAST CANCER, 2021, 28 (02) : 459 - 464
  • [43] Personalized breast cancer screening with selective addition of digital breast tomosynthesis through artificial intelligence
    Dahlblom, Victor
    Tingberg, Anders
    Zackrisson, Sophia
    Dustler, Magnus
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL IMAGING, 2023, 10
  • [44] The Effect of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Adoption on Facility-Level Breast Cancer Screening Volume
    Lee, Christoph I.
    Zhu, Weiwei
    Onega, Tracy L.
    Germino, Jessica
    O'Meara, Ellen S.
    Lehman, Constance D.
    Henderson, Louise M.
    Haas, Jennifer S.
    Kerlikowske, Karla
    Sprague, Brian L.
    Rauscher, Garth H.
    Tosteson, Anna N. A.
    Alford-Teaster, Jennifer
    Wernli, Karen J.
    Miglioretti, Diana L.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2018, 211 (05) : 957 - 963
  • [45] Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Implementation: Considerations for Emerging Breast Cancer Screening Bundled Payment Models
    Fleming, Margaret M.
    Hughes, Danny R.
    Golding, Lauren P.
    McGinty, Geraldine B.
    MacFarlane, Dan
    Duszak, Richard, Jr.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY, 2019, 16 (07) : 902 - 907
  • [46] Value of automated breast ultrasound in screening: Standalone and as a supplemental to digital breast tomosynthesis
    Aribal, Erkin
    Seker, Mustafa Ege
    Guldogan, Nilgun
    Yilmaz, Ebru
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2024, 155 (08) : 1466 - 1475
  • [47] Synthesized Mammography: The New Standard of Care When Screening for Breast Cancer with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis?
    Ambinder, Emily B.
    Harvey, Susan C.
    Panigrahi, Babita
    Li, Ximin
    Woods, Ryan W.
    ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2018, 25 (08) : 973 - 976
  • [48] Screening Breast Ultrasound Following Tomosynthesis
    Whitman, Gary J.
    Scoggins, Marion E.
    ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2022, 29 (03) : 348 - 349
  • [50] Tomosynthesis as a screening tool for breast cancer: A systematic review
    Coop, P.
    Cowling, C.
    Lawson, C.
    RADIOGRAPHY, 2016, 22 (03) : E190 - E195