Systematic review of 3D mammography for breast cancer screening

被引:51
|
作者
Hodgson, Robert [1 ]
Heywang-Koebrunner, Sylvia H. [2 ]
Harvey, Susan C. [3 ]
Edwards, Mary [1 ]
Shaikh, Javed [1 ]
Arber, Mick [1 ]
Glanville, Julie [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ York, York Hlth Econ Consortium, Enterprise House,Innovat Way, York YO10 5NQ, N Yorkshire, England
[2] Referenzzentrum Mammog Munchen, Munich, Germany
[3] Johns Hopkins Med Inst, Baltimore, MD 21205 USA
来源
BREAST | 2016年 / 27卷
关键词
Tomosynthesis; Full-field digital mammography; Breast cancer screening; Tumour imaging; Mammography; Systematic review; FIELD DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; TOMOSYNTHESIS; 3D-MAMMOGRAPHY; FILM MAMMOGRAPHY; 2D-MAMMOGRAPHY; COMBINATION; EXPERIENCE; PROGRAM; FFDM;
D O I
10.1016/j.breast.2016.01.002
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
This review investigated the relative performance of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) (alone or with full field digital mammography (FFDM) or synthetic digital mammography) compared with FFDM alone for detecting breast cancer lesions in asymptomatic women. A systematic review was carried out according to systematic reviewing principles provided in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy. A protocol was developed a priori. The review was registered with PROSPERO (number CRD42014013949). Searches were undertaken in October 2014. Following selection, five studies were eligible. Higher cancer detection rates were observed when comparing DBT + FFDM with FFDM in two European studies: the summary difference per 1000 screens was 2.43 (95% CI: 1.8 to 3.1). Both European studies found lower false positive rates for individual readers. One found a lower recall rate based on conditional recall. The second study was not designed to compare post-arbitration recall rates between FFDM and DBT + FFDM. One European study presented data on interval cancer rates; sensitivity and specificity for DBT + FFDM were both higher compared to FFDM. One large multicentre US study showed a higher cancer detection rate for DBT + FFDM, while two smaller US studies did not find statistically significant differences. Reductions in recall and false positive rates were observed in the US studies in favour of DBT + FFDM. In comparison to FFDM, DBT, as an adjunct to FFDM, has a higher cancer detection rate, increasing the effectiveness of breast cancer screening. Additional benefits of DBT may also include reduced recalls and, consequently, reduced costs and distress caused to women who would have been recalled. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:52 / 61
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Cost Effectiveness of Breast Cancer Screening Using Mammography; a Systematic Review
    Rashidian, Arash
    Barfar, Eshagh
    Hosseini, Hamed
    Nosratnejad, Shirin
    Barooti, Esmat
    IRANIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2013, 42 (04) : 347 - 357
  • [2] Digital breast tomosynthesis (3D mammography) for breast cancer screening and for assessment of screen-recalled findings: review of the evidence
    Li, Tong
    Marinovich, Michael Luke
    Houssami, Nehmat
    EXPERT REVIEW OF ANTICANCER THERAPY, 2018, 18 (08) : 785 - 791
  • [3] Breast cancer worry in further examination of mammography screening - a systematic review
    Metsala, Eija
    Pajukari, Arja
    Aro, Arja R.
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF CARING SCIENCES, 2012, 26 (04) : 773 - 786
  • [4] MODELLING THE BUDGET IMPACT OF INTRODUCING 3D MAMMOGRAPHY FOR BREAST CANCER SCREENING IN GERMANY
    Schubert, T.
    Scheer, P.
    Vogelmann, T.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2019, 22 : S471 - S471
  • [5] X-ray dosimetry in breast cancer screening: 2D and 3D mammography
    Di Maria, S.
    Vedantham, S.
    Vaz, P.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2022, 151
  • [6] The efficacy of using CAD for detection of breast cancer in mammography screening - A systematic review
    Henriksen, E. L.
    Carlsen, J. F.
    Vejborg, I.
    Nielsen, M. B.
    Lauridsen, C. A.
    ACTA RADIOLOGICA, 2017, 58 : 25 - 25
  • [7] The effect of mammography pain on repeat participation in breast cancer screening: A systematic review
    Whelehan, Patsy
    Evans, Andy
    Wells, Mary
    MacGillivray, Steve
    BREAST, 2013, 22 (04): : 389 - 394
  • [8] Cochrane review on screening for breast cancer with mammography
    Olsen, O
    Gotzsche, PC
    LANCET, 2001, 358 (9290): : 1340 - 1342
  • [9] Automated 3D Ultrasound as an Adjunct to Screening Mammography Programs in Dense Breast: Literature Review and Metanalysis
    Gatta, Gianluca
    Somma, Francesco
    Sardu, Celestino
    De Chiara, Marco
    Massafra, Raffaella
    Fanizzi, Annarita
    La Forgia, Daniele
    Cuccurullo, Vincenzo
    Iovino, Francesco
    Clemente, Alfredo
    Marfella, Raffaele
    Di Grezia, Graziella
    JOURNAL OF PERSONALIZED MEDICINE, 2023, 13 (12):
  • [10] Performance of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis, Synthetic Mammography, and Digital Mammography in Breast Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Alabousi, Mostafa
    Wadera, Akshay
    Al-Ghita, Mohammed Kashif
    Al-Ghetaa, Rayeh Kashef
    Salameh, Jean-Paul
    Pozdnyakov, Alex
    Zha, Nanxi
    Samoilov, Lucy
    Sharifabadi, Anahita Dehmoobad
    Sadeghirad, Behnam
    Freitas, Vivianne
    McInnes, Matthew D. F.
    Alabousi, Abdullah
    JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2021, 113 (06): : 680 - 690