Cargando…

Analysis of Participant Factors That Affect the Diagnostic Performance of Screening Mammography: A Report of the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea

OBJECTIVE: To analyze participant factors that affect the diagnostic performance of screening mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We enrolled 128756 cases from 10 hospitals between 2005 and 2010. We analyzed recall rate, cancer detection rate (CDR) per 1000 examinations, positive predictive value (P...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kim, Young Joong, Lee, Eun Hye, Jun, Jae Kwan, Shin, Dong-Rock, Park, Young Mi, Kim, Hye-Won, Kim, Youme, Kim, Keum Won, Lim, Hyo Soon, Park, Jeong Seon, Kim, Hye Jung, Jo, Hye-Mi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Society of Radiology 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5447638/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28670157
http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2017.18.4.624
_version_ 1783239373267927040
author Kim, Young Joong
Lee, Eun Hye
Jun, Jae Kwan
Shin, Dong-Rock
Park, Young Mi
Kim, Hye-Won
Kim, Youme
Kim, Keum Won
Lim, Hyo Soon
Park, Jeong Seon
Kim, Hye Jung
Jo, Hye-Mi
author_facet Kim, Young Joong
Lee, Eun Hye
Jun, Jae Kwan
Shin, Dong-Rock
Park, Young Mi
Kim, Hye-Won
Kim, Youme
Kim, Keum Won
Lim, Hyo Soon
Park, Jeong Seon
Kim, Hye Jung
Jo, Hye-Mi
author_sort Kim, Young Joong
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To analyze participant factors that affect the diagnostic performance of screening mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We enrolled 128756 cases from 10 hospitals between 2005 and 2010. We analyzed recall rate, cancer detection rate (CDR) per 1000 examinations, positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, specificity, false positive rate (FPR), and interval cancer rate (ICR) per 1000 negative examinations according to participant factors including age, breast density, and number of visit to the same institution, and adjusted for confounding variables. RESULTS: Increasing age improved recall rates (27.4% in 40's, 17.5% in 50's, 11.1% in 60's, and 8.6% in 70's), CDR (2.7, 3.2, 2.0, and 2.4), PPV (1.0, 1.8, 1.8, and 2.8%), sensitivity (81.3, 88.8, 90.3, and 94.7%), specificity (72.7, 82.7, 89.0, and 91.7%), and FPR (27.3, 17.3, 11.0, and 8.4%) (p < 0.05). Higher breast density impaired recall rates (4.0% in P1, 9.0% in P2, 28.9% in P3, and 27.8% in P4), PPV (3.3, 2.3, 1.2, and 1.3%), specificity (96.1, 91.2, 71.4, and 72.5%), and FPR (3.9, 8.9, 28.6, and 27.6%) (p < 0.001). It also increased CDR (1.3, 2.1, 3.3, and 3.6) and ICR (0.2, 0.3, 0.6, and 1.6) (p < 0.05). Successive visits to the same institution improved recall rates (20.9% for one visit, 10.7% for two visits, 7.7% for more than three visits), PPV (1.6, 2.8, and 2.7%), specificity (79.4, 89.6, and 92.5%), and FPR (20.6, 10.4, and 7.5%) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Young age and dense breasts negatively affected diagnostic performance in mammography screening, whereas successive visits to the same institution had a positive effect. Examinee education for successive visits to the same institution would improve the diagnostic performance.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5447638
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher The Korean Society of Radiology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54476382017-07-01 Analysis of Participant Factors That Affect the Diagnostic Performance of Screening Mammography: A Report of the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea Kim, Young Joong Lee, Eun Hye Jun, Jae Kwan Shin, Dong-Rock Park, Young Mi Kim, Hye-Won Kim, Youme Kim, Keum Won Lim, Hyo Soon Park, Jeong Seon Kim, Hye Jung Jo, Hye-Mi Korean J Radiol Breast Imaging OBJECTIVE: To analyze participant factors that affect the diagnostic performance of screening mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We enrolled 128756 cases from 10 hospitals between 2005 and 2010. We analyzed recall rate, cancer detection rate (CDR) per 1000 examinations, positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, specificity, false positive rate (FPR), and interval cancer rate (ICR) per 1000 negative examinations according to participant factors including age, breast density, and number of visit to the same institution, and adjusted for confounding variables. RESULTS: Increasing age improved recall rates (27.4% in 40's, 17.5% in 50's, 11.1% in 60's, and 8.6% in 70's), CDR (2.7, 3.2, 2.0, and 2.4), PPV (1.0, 1.8, 1.8, and 2.8%), sensitivity (81.3, 88.8, 90.3, and 94.7%), specificity (72.7, 82.7, 89.0, and 91.7%), and FPR (27.3, 17.3, 11.0, and 8.4%) (p < 0.05). Higher breast density impaired recall rates (4.0% in P1, 9.0% in P2, 28.9% in P3, and 27.8% in P4), PPV (3.3, 2.3, 1.2, and 1.3%), specificity (96.1, 91.2, 71.4, and 72.5%), and FPR (3.9, 8.9, 28.6, and 27.6%) (p < 0.001). It also increased CDR (1.3, 2.1, 3.3, and 3.6) and ICR (0.2, 0.3, 0.6, and 1.6) (p < 0.05). Successive visits to the same institution improved recall rates (20.9% for one visit, 10.7% for two visits, 7.7% for more than three visits), PPV (1.6, 2.8, and 2.7%), specificity (79.4, 89.6, and 92.5%), and FPR (20.6, 10.4, and 7.5%) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Young age and dense breasts negatively affected diagnostic performance in mammography screening, whereas successive visits to the same institution had a positive effect. Examinee education for successive visits to the same institution would improve the diagnostic performance. The Korean Society of Radiology 2017 2017-05-19 /pmc/articles/PMC5447638/ /pubmed/28670157 http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2017.18.4.624 Text en Copyright © 2017 The Korean Society of Radiology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Breast Imaging
Kim, Young Joong
Lee, Eun Hye
Jun, Jae Kwan
Shin, Dong-Rock
Park, Young Mi
Kim, Hye-Won
Kim, Youme
Kim, Keum Won
Lim, Hyo Soon
Park, Jeong Seon
Kim, Hye Jung
Jo, Hye-Mi
Analysis of Participant Factors That Affect the Diagnostic Performance of Screening Mammography: A Report of the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea
title Analysis of Participant Factors That Affect the Diagnostic Performance of Screening Mammography: A Report of the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea
title_full Analysis of Participant Factors That Affect the Diagnostic Performance of Screening Mammography: A Report of the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea
title_fullStr Analysis of Participant Factors That Affect the Diagnostic Performance of Screening Mammography: A Report of the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea
title_full_unstemmed Analysis of Participant Factors That Affect the Diagnostic Performance of Screening Mammography: A Report of the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea
title_short Analysis of Participant Factors That Affect the Diagnostic Performance of Screening Mammography: A Report of the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea
title_sort analysis of participant factors that affect the diagnostic performance of screening mammography: a report of the alliance for breast cancer screening in korea
topic Breast Imaging
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5447638/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28670157
http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2017.18.4.624
work_keys_str_mv AT kimyoungjoong analysisofparticipantfactorsthataffectthediagnosticperformanceofscreeningmammographyareportoftheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT leeeunhye analysisofparticipantfactorsthataffectthediagnosticperformanceofscreeningmammographyareportoftheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT junjaekwan analysisofparticipantfactorsthataffectthediagnosticperformanceofscreeningmammographyareportoftheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT shindongrock analysisofparticipantfactorsthataffectthediagnosticperformanceofscreeningmammographyareportoftheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT parkyoungmi analysisofparticipantfactorsthataffectthediagnosticperformanceofscreeningmammographyareportoftheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT kimhyewon analysisofparticipantfactorsthataffectthediagnosticperformanceofscreeningmammographyareportoftheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT kimyoume analysisofparticipantfactorsthataffectthediagnosticperformanceofscreeningmammographyareportoftheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT kimkeumwon analysisofparticipantfactorsthataffectthediagnosticperformanceofscreeningmammographyareportoftheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT limhyosoon analysisofparticipantfactorsthataffectthediagnosticperformanceofscreeningmammographyareportoftheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT parkjeongseon analysisofparticipantfactorsthataffectthediagnosticperformanceofscreeningmammographyareportoftheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT kimhyejung analysisofparticipantfactorsthataffectthediagnosticperformanceofscreeningmammographyareportoftheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT johyemi analysisofparticipantfactorsthataffectthediagnosticperformanceofscreeningmammographyareportoftheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT analysisofparticipantfactorsthataffectthediagnosticperformanceofscreeningmammographyareportoftheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea