Adjunct screening with tomosynthesis or ultrasound in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: Interim report of a prospective comparative trial

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Volumn 34, Issue 16, 2016, Pages 1882-1888

  Tagliafico, Alberto S ^a   Calabrese, Massimo ^b   Mariscotti, Giovanna ^c   Durando, Manuela ^c   Tosto, Simona ^b   Monetti, Francesco ^b   Airaldi, Sonia ^a   Bignotti, Bianca ^a   Nori, Jacopo ^d   Bagni, Antonella ^e   Signori, Alessio ^a   Sormani, Maria Pia ^a   Houssami, Nehmat ^f  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GENOA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GENOA   (Italy)

^c CITTÀ DELLA SALUTE E DELLA SCIENZA HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^d Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Careggi   (Italy)

^e BUFALINI HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^f UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST CARCINOMA; BREAST DENSITY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY DEVICE; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR POSITIVE BREAST CANCER; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY SYSTEM; MIDDLE AGED; MULTICENTER STUDY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGESTERONE RECEPTOR POSITIVE BREAST CANCER; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; ULTRASOUND TRANSDUCER;

EID: 84973445533     PISSN: 0732183X     EISSN: 15277755     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.4147     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Nelson HD, Tyne K, Naik A, et al; U.S. Preventive Services Task Force: Screening for breast cancer: An update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 151:727-737, W237-42, 2009
2. Lauby-Secretan B, Scoccianti C, Loomis D, et al; International Agency for Research on Cancer Handbook Working Group: Breast-cancer screening-viewpoint of the IARC Working Group. N Engl J Med 372:2353-2358, 2015
3. McCormack VA, dos Santos Silva I: Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: A meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 15:1159-1169, 2006
4. Kerlikowske K, Zhu W, Tosteson AN, et al; Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium: Identifying women with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer: A cohort study. Ann Intern Med 162:673-681, 2015
5. Houssami N, Abraham LA, Kerlikowske K, et al: Risk factors for second screen-detected or interval breast cancers in women with a personal history of breast cancer participating in mammography screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 22:946-961, 2013
6. Rhodes DJ, Radecki Breitkopf C, Ziegenfuss JY, et al: Awareness of breast density and its impact on breast cancer detection and risk. J Clin Oncol 33: 1143-1150, 2015
7. Houssami N, Ciatto S: The evolving role of new imaging methods in breast screening. Prev Med 53:123-126, 2011
8. Sprague BL, Stout NK, Schechter C, et al: Benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts. Ann Intern Med 162:157-166, 2015
9. Venturini E, Losio C, Panizza P, et al: Tailored breast cancer screening program with microdose mammography, US, and MR Imaging: Short-term results of a pilot study in 40-49-year-old women. Radiology 268:347-355, 2013
10. Corsetti V, Houssami N, Ghirardi M, et al: Evidence of the effect of adjunct ultrasound screening in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: Interval breast cancers at 1 year follow-up. Eur J Cancer 47:1021-1026, 2011
11. Hooley RJ, Greenberg KL, Stackhouse RM, et al: Screening US in patients with mammographically dense breasts: Initial experience with Connecticut Public Act 09-41. Radiology 265:59-69, 2012
12. Corsetti V, Houssami N, Ferrari A, et al: Breast screening with ultrasound in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: Evidence on incremental cancer detection and false positives, and associated cost. Eur J Cancer 44:539-544, 2008
13. Brem RF, Tabár L, Duffy SW, et al: Assessing improvement in detection of breast cancer with three-dimensional automated breast US in women with dense breast tissue: The SomoInsight Study. Radiology 274:663-673, 2015
14. Kelly KM, Dean J, Comulada WS, et al: Breast cancer detection using automated whole breast ultrasound and mammography in radiographically dense breasts. Eur Radiol 20:734-742, 2010
15. Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, et al; ACRIN 6666 Investigators: Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA 299:2151-2163, 2008
16. Berg WA, Zhang Z, Lehrer D, et al; ACRIN 6666 Investigators: Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk. JAMA 307:1394-1404, 2012
17. Houssami N, Macaskill P, Bernardi D, et al: Breast screening using 2D-mammography or integrating digital breast tomosynthesis (3D-mammography) for single-reading or double-reading-evidence to guide future screening strategies. Eur J Cancer 50:1799-1807, 2014
18. Ciatto S, Houssami N, Bernardi D, et al: Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomosynthesis for population breast-cancer screening (STORM): A prospective comparison study. Lancet Oncol 14:583-589, 2013
19. Skaane P, Bandos AI, Gullien R, et al: Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a populationbased screening program. Radiology 267:47-56, 2013
20. Skaane P, Bandos AI, Gullien R, et al: Prospective trial comparing full-field digital mammography (FFDM) versus combined FFDM and tomosynthesis in a population-based screening programme using independent double reading with arbitration. Eur Radiol 23: 2061-2071, 2013
21. Friedewald SM, Rafferty EA, Rose SL, et al: Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography. JAMA 311: 2499-2507, 2014
22. American College of Radiology (ACR): ACR BI-RADS: Breast imaging reporting and data system, Breast Imaging Atlas. American College of Radiology, Reston, VA, 2003
23. American College of Radiology (ACR): ACR BI-RADS fifth edition: Breast imaging reporting and data system, Breast Imaging Atlas. American College of Radiology, Reston, VA, 2013
24. Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, et al: European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Fourth edition-summary document. Ann Oncol 19:614-622, 2008
25. Skaane P, Bandos AI, Eben EB, et al: Two-view digital breast tomosynthesis screening with synthetically reconstructed projection images: Comparison with digital breast tomosynthesis with full-field digital mammographic images. Radiology 271:655-663, 2014
26. McCarthy AM, Kontos D, Synnestvedt M, et al: Screening outcomes following implementation of digital breast tomosynthesis in a general-population screening program. J Natl Cancer Inst 106:dju316, 2014
27. Barratt A: Overdiagnosis in mammography screening: A 45 year journey from shadowy idea to acknowledged reality. BMJ 350:h867, 2015