Impact of and interaction between the availability of prior examinations and DBT on the interpretation of negative and benign mammograms

Does the availability of prior mammograms improve radiologists' observer performance?-a scoping review

Objective

The objective of this review was to examine the impact of previous mammogram availability on radiologists' performance from screening populations and experimental studies.

Materials and Methods

A search of the literature was conducted using five databases: MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and CINAHL as well as Google and reference lists of articles. Keywords were combined with "AND" or "OR" or "WITH" and included "prior mammograms, diagnostic performance, initial images, diagnostic efficacy, subsequent images, previous imaging, and radiologist's performance". Studies that assessed the impact of previous mammogram availability on radiologists' performance were reviewed. The Standard for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy guidelines was used to critically appraise individual sources of evidence.

Results

A total of 15 articles were reviewed. The sample of mammogram cases used across these studies varied from 36 to 1,208,051. Prior mammograms did not affect sensitivity [with priors: 62-86% (mean = 73.3%); without priors: 69.4-87.4% (mean = 75.8%)] and cancer detection rate, but increased specificity [with priors: 72-96% (mean = 87.5%); without priors: 63-87% (mean = 80.5%)] and reduced false-positive rates [with priors: 3.7 to 36% (mean = 19.9%); without priors 13.3-49% (mean = 31.4%)], recall rates [with priors: 3.8-57% (mean = 26.6%); without priors: [4.9%-67.5% (mean = 37.9%)], and abnormal interpretation rate decreased by 4% with priors. Evidence for the associations between the availability of prior mammograms and positive-predictive value, area under the curve (AUC) from the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) and localisation ROC AUC, and positive-predictive value of recall is limited and unclear.

Conclusion

Availability of prior mammograms reduces recall rates, false-positive rates, abnormal interpretation rates, and increases specificity without affecting sensitivity and cancer detection rate.

Breast cancer diagnosis in Inner-City African American and Hispanic women: The importance of early screening

PURPOSE

To evaluate the diagnosis of breast cancer in inner-city African-American and Hispanic women under age 50 to support the importance of screening in this population.

METHODS

This retrospective chart review included women newly diagnosed with breast cancer from 1/1/2015 to 1/1/2019 in a city hospital mainly serving minority patients. Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used for analysis.

RESULTS

In this cohort of 108 newly diagnosed African-American (63%) and Hispanic (31%) women, 60/108 (56%) presented with a site of palpable concern for diagnostic workup, and the remaining were diagnosed via asymptomatic screening. Women ages 30-49 were significantly more likely to present with a site of palpable concern when compared to women ages 50-69 (68% vs. 44%, p = 0.045). Additionally, women ages 30-49 were more likely to have triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) than women ages 50-69 (20% vs. 10%, p = 0.222). However, women ages 30-49 were less likely to have prior mammogram than women ages 50-69 (24% vs. 46%, p = 0.062).

CONCLUSION

African-American and Hispanic women ages 30-49 were more likely to present with a site of palpable concern and TNBC than those ages 50-69. However, these young minority women ages 30-49 were less likely to have prior screening mammograms when compared to those ages 50-69. Our data highlights the importance of starting screening mammography no later than age 40 in African-American and Hispanic women. In addition, these women should have risk assessment for breast cancer no later than age 30 and be screened appropriately.

Impact of prior mammograms on combined reading of digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis

Background Although digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is an emerging technique yielding higher sensitivity and specificity compared to digital mammography (DM) alone, relative contribution of prior mammograms on the interpretation of DBT combined with DM has not been investigated. Purpose To retrospectively compare the diagnostic performances of DM, DM + DBT, and DM + DBT with prior mammograms. Material and Methods Three breast radiologists independently reviewed images of 116 patients with 24 cancers in the sequential order of DM, DM + DBT, and DM + DBT with prior mammograms using Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) assessment categories. Results The average areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of DM, DM + DBT, and DM + DBT with prior mammograms were 0.712, 0.777, and 0.816, respectively. Adding prior mammograms did not significantly affect the AUC of DM + DBT ( P = 0.108), whereas adding DBT significantly increased the AUC of DM ( P = 0.009). Sensitivity for DM, DM + DBT, and DM + DBT with prior mammograms was 58.3%, 69.4%, and 69.4%, and specificities were 84.1%, 85.9%, and 93.8%, respectively. Addition of DBT significantly increased the sensitivity ( P = 0.0090) of DM. Prior mammograms significantly improved the specificity of DM + DBT ( P = 0.0004), whereas adding prior mammogram did not affect sensitivity of DM + DBT ( P = 1.000). Conclusion DBT significantly increases the overall sensitivity and diagnostic performance of DM. Prior mammograms significantly increase the specificity of DM + DBT but have no significant effect on sensitivity and overall diagnostic performance.

Significance and Application of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for the BI-RADS Classification of Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Full-field digital mammography (FFDM) with dense breasts has a high rate of missed diagnosis, and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) could reduce organization overlapping and provide more reliable images for BI-RADS classification. This study aims to explore application of COMBO (FFDM+DBT) for effect and significance of BI-RADS classification of breast cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this study, we selected 832 patients who had been treated from May 2013 to November 2013. Classify FFDM and COMBO examination according to BI-RADS separately and compare the differences for glands in the image of the same patient in judgment, mass characteristics display and indirect signs. Employ Paired Wilcoxon rank sum test was used in 79 breast cancer patients to find differences between two examine methods.

RESULTS

The results indicated that COMBO pattern is able to observe more details in distribution of glands when estimating content. Paired Wilcoxon rank sum test showed that overall classification level of COMBO is higher significantly compared to FFDM to BI-RADS diagnosis and classification of breast (P<0.05). The area under FFDM ROC curve is 0.805, while that is 0.941 in COMBO pattern. COMBO shows relation of mass with the surrounding tissues, the calcification in the mass, and multiple foci clearly in breast cancer tissues. The optimal sensitivity of cut-off value in COMBO pattern is 82.9%, which is higher than that in FFDM (60%). They share the same specificity which is both 93.2%.

CONCLUSIONS

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) could be used for the BI-RADS classification in breast cancer in clinical.

Effect of the Availability of Prior Full-Field Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Images on the Interpretation of Mammograms

PURPOSE

To assess the effect of and interaction between the availability of prior images and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) images in decisions to recall women during mammogram interpretation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Verbal informed consent was obtained for this HIPAA-compliant institutional review board-approved protocol. Eight radiologists independently interpreted twice deidentified mammograms obtained in 153 women (age range, 37-83 years; mean age, 53.7 years ± 9.3 [standard deviation]) in a mode by reader by case-balanced fully crossed study. Each study consisted of current and prior full-field digital mammography (FFDM) images and DBT images that were acquired in our facility between June 2009 and January 2013. For one reading, sequential ratings were provided by using (a) current FFDM images only, (b) current FFDM and DBT images, and (c) current FFDM, DBT, and prior FFDM images. The other reading consisted of (a) current FFDM images only, (b) current and prior FFDM images, and (c) current FFDM, prior FFDM, and DBT images. Fifty verified cancer cases, 60 negative and benign cases (clinically not recalled), and 43 benign cases (clinically recalled) were included. Recall recommendations and interaction between the effect of prior FFDM and DBT images were assessed by using a generalized linear model accounting for case and reader variability.

RESULTS

Average recall rates in noncancer cases were significantly reduced with the addition of prior FFDM images by 34% (145 of 421) and 32% (106 of 333) without and with DBT images, respectively (P < .001). However, this recall reduction was achieved at the cost of a corresponding 7% (23 of 345) and 4% (14 of 353) reduction in sensitivity (P = .006). In contrast, availability of DBT images resulted in a smaller reduction in recall rates (false-positive interpretations) of 19% (76 of 409) and 26% (71 of 276) without and with prior FFDM images, respectively (P = .001). Availability of DBT images resulted in 4% (15 of 338) and 8% (25 of 322) increases in sensitivity, respectively (P = .007). The effects of the availability of prior FFDM images or DBT images did not significantly change regardless of the sequence in presentation (P = .81 and P = .47 for specificity and sensitivity, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The availability of prior FFDM or DBT images is a largely independent contributing factor in reducing recall recommendations during mammographic interpretation.