Accuracy of short-interval follow-up mammograms by patient and radiologist characteristics

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 190, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 1200-1208

  Aiello Bowles, Erin J ^a   Miglioretti, Diana L ^a   Sickles, Edward A ^b   Abraham, Linn ^a   Carney, Patricia A ^c   Yankaskas, Bonnie C ^d   Elmore, Joann G ^e  

^a CENTER FOR HEALTH STUDIES   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Diagnostic mammography; Sensitivity; Short interval follow up mammography; Specificity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER SCREENING; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONALISM; RADIOLOGIST; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TIME FACTORS; WORKLOAD;

EID: 43649090200     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.07.3041     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Sickles EA, Miglioretti DL, Ballard-Barbash R, et al. Performance benchmarks for diagnostic mammography. Radiology 2005; 235:775-790
2. Kerlikowske K, Smith-Bindman R, Abraham LA, et al. Breast cancer yield for screening mammographic examinations with recommendation for short-interval follow-up. Radiology 2005; 234:684-692
3. American College of Radiology. ACR BI-RADS: mammography, 4th ed. In: ACR Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: breast imaging atlas. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 2003
4. Yasmeen S, Romano PS, Pettinger M, et al. Frequency and predictive value of a mammographic recommendation for short-interval follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003; 95:429-436
5. Varas X, Leborgne JH, Leborgne F, Mezzera J, Jaumandreu S, Leborgne F. Revisiting the mammographic follow-up of BI-RADS category 3 lesions. AJR 2002; 179:691-695
6. Sickles EA. Periodic mammographic follow-up of probably benign lesions: results in 3,184 consecutive cases. Radiology 1991; 179:463-468
7. Vizcaino I, Gadea L, Andreo L, et al. Short-term follow-up results in 795 nonpalpable probably benign lesions detected at screening mammography. Radiology 2001; 219:475-483
8. Varas X, Leborgne F, Leborgne JH. Nonpalpable, probably benign lesions: role of follow-up mammography. Radiology 1992; 184:409-414
9. Geller BM, Barlow WE, Ballard-Barbash R, et al. Use of the American College of Radiology BI-RADS to report on the mammographic evaluation of women with signs and symptoms of breast disease. Radiology 2002; 222:536-542
10. Taplin SH, Ichikawa LE, Kerlikowske K, et al. Concordance of breast imaging reporting and data system assessments and management recommendations in screening mammography. Radiology 2002; 222:529-535
11. Sickles EA. Probably benign breast lesions: when should follow-up be recommended and what is the optimal follow-up protocol? Radiology 1999; 213:11-14
12. Sickles EA. Management of probably benign breast lesions. Radiol Clin North Am 1995; 33:1123-1130
13. Sickles EA, Miglioretti DL, Ballard-Barbash R, et al. Performance benchmarks for diagnostic mammography. National Cancer Institute, Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium Website. http://breast-screening. cancer.gov/data/ benchmarks/diagnostic/tableSens Spec.html. Accessed August 1, 2006
14. Barlow WE, Lehman CD, Zheng Y, et al. Performance of diagnostic mammography for women with signs or symptoms of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002; 94:1151-1159
15. Kavanagh AM, Cawson J, Byrnes GB, et al. Hormone replacement therapy, percent mammographic density, and sensitivity of mammography. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005; 14:1060-1064
16. Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC, et al. Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med 2003; 138:168-175
17. Smith-Bindman R, Chu P, Miglioretti DL, et al. Physician predictors of mammographic accuracy. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005; 97:358-367
18. Beam CA, Conant EF, Sickles EA. Association of volume and volume-independent factors with accuracy in screening mammogram interpretation. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003; 95:282-290
19. Barlow WE, Chi C, Carney PA, et al. Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96:1840-1850
20. Moss SM, Blanks RG, Bennett RL. Is radiologists' volume of mammography reading related to accuracy? A critical review of the literature. Clin Radiol 2005; 60:623-666
21. Ballard-Barbash R, Taplin SH, Yankaskas BC, et al. Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium: a national mammography screening and outcomes database. AJR 1997; 169:1001-1008
22. Zeger SL, Liang KY. Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes. Biometrics 1986; 42:121-130
23. Rosenberg RD, Yankaskas BC, Hunt WC, et al. Effect of variations in operational definitions on performance estimates for screening mammography. Acad Radiol 2000; 7:1058-1068