Detection of breast cancer presenting as a mass in women with dense breasts — digital breast tomosynthesis versus full-field digital mammography
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32471/exp-oncology.2312-8852.vol-42-no-3.14898Keywords:
breast cancer, dense breast, digital breast tomosynthesis, full-field digital mammographyAbstract
Summary. Aim: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of digital breast tomosynthesis compared with full-field digital mammography in detection of breast cancer presenting as a mass in women with dense breasts. Маterials and Methods: This study included 347 asymptomatic and symptomatic patients with dense breasts who underwent full-field digital mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis and hand-held full breast ultrasound. 57 core-needle biopsies were performed. Pathology included 31 invasive cancers and 26 non-cancerous lesions. Results: Sensitivity of full-field digital mammography was 61.3% [0.422–0.789] and sensitivity of digital breast tomosynthesis was 77.4% [0.589–0.904]. Specificity of full-field digital mammography was 92.7% [0.893–0.953] that was 2.2% lower than the specificity of digital breast tomosynthesis — 94.9% [0.919–0.971]. Conclusion: Results of our study showed superior sensitivity and specificity of digital breast tomosynthesis compared to full-field digital mammography for detection of malignant masses in women with dense breasts.
References
Dykan IM, Bozhok YeM, Gurando AV, et al. Digital tomosynthesis in the diagnosis of breast diseases: luxury or necessity? (Analytical review). Zdorov’e Zhenshhiny 2017; 8: 108–15 (in Ukrainian).
Kopans DB. Digital breast tomosynthesis from concept to clinical care. AJR Am J of Roentgenol 2014; 202: 299–308.
Förnvik D, Kataoka M, Iima M, et al. The role of breast tomosynthesis in a predominantly dense breast population at a tertiary breast centre: breast density assessment and diagnostic performance in comparison with MRI. Eur Radiol 2018; 28: 3194–203.
Freer Pe. Mammographic breast density: impact on breast cancer risk and implications for screening. Radiographics 2015; 35: 302–15.
Duffy SW, Morrish OWE, Allgood PC, et al. Mammographic density and breast cancer risk in breast screening assessment cases and women with a family history of breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 2018; 88: 48–56.
Wolfe JN. Breast patterns as an index of risk for developing breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1976; 126: 1130–7.
American College of Radiology. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System® (BI-RADS®). 4th ed. Reston, VA, American College of Radiology; 2003.
D’Orsi CJ, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB, et al. ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA, American College of Radiology; 2013.
Goksuluk D, Korkmaz S, Zararsiz G, et al. EasyROC: an interactive web-tool for ROC curve analysis using r language environment. The R Journal 2016; 8: 213–30.
Dykan IM, Bozhok YeM, Gurando AV. The first experience of using 3D mammography in Ukraine. Luchevaja diagnostika. Luchevaja Terapija 2018; 2: 40–8 (in Ukrainian).
Devolli-Disha E, Manxhuka-Kërliu S, Ymeri H, et al. Comparative accuracy of mammography and ultrasound in women with breast symptoms according to age and breast density. Bosn J Basic Med Sci 2009; 9: 131–6.
Boyd NF, Martin LJ, Yaffe MJ, et al. Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: current understanding and future prospects. Breast Cancer Res 2011; 13: 223.
Thigpen D, Kappler A, Brem R. The role of ultrasound in screening dense breasts — a review of the literature and practical solutions for implementation. Diagnostics (Basel) 2018; 8: 20.
Youk JH, Kim EK, Kim MJ, et al. Sonographically guided 14-gauge core needle biopsy of breast masses: a review of 2,420 cases with long-term follow-up. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008; 190: 202–7.
Chan HP, Helvie MA, Hadjiiski L, et al. Characterization of breast masses in digital breast tomosynthesis and digital mammograms: an observer performance study. Acad Radiol 2017; 24: 1372–9.
Andersson I, Ikeda D, Zackrisson S, et al. Breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography: a comparison of breast cancer visibility and BIRADS classification in a population of cancers with subtle mammographic findings. Eur Radiol 2008; 18: 2817–25.
Rafferty EA, Park JM, Philpotts LE, et al. Assessing radiologist performance using combined digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis compared with digital mammography alone: results of a multicenter, multireader trial. Radiology 2013; 266: 104–13.
Michell MJ, Iqbal A, Wasan RK, et al. A comparison of the accuracy of film-screen mammography, full-field digital mammography, and digital breast tomosynthesis. Clin Radiol 2012; 67: 976–81.
Noroozian M, Hadjiiski L, Rahnama-Moghadam S, et al. Digital breast tomosynthesis is comparable to mammographic spot views for mass characterization. Radiology 2012; 262: 61–8.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Experimental Oncology
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
