Cargando…
Can mechanical imaging increase the specificity of mammography screening?
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate the effects of adding adjunct mechanical imaging to mammography breast screening. We hypothesized that mechanical imaging could detect increased local pressure caused by both malignant and benign breast lesions and that a pressure threshold for malignancy...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5491561/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28108837 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4723-6 |
_version_ | 1783247154348818432 |
---|---|
author | Dustler, Magnus Förnvik, Daniel Timberg, Pontus Andersson, Ingvar Petersson, Hannie Brorson, Håkan Tingberg, Anders Zackrisson, Sophia |
author_facet | Dustler, Magnus Förnvik, Daniel Timberg, Pontus Andersson, Ingvar Petersson, Hannie Brorson, Håkan Tingberg, Anders Zackrisson, Sophia |
author_sort | Dustler, Magnus |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate the effects of adding adjunct mechanical imaging to mammography breast screening. We hypothesized that mechanical imaging could detect increased local pressure caused by both malignant and benign breast lesions and that a pressure threshold for malignancy could be established. The impact of this on breast screening was investigated with regard to reductions in recall and biopsy rates. METHODS: 155 women recalled from breast screening were included in the study, which was approved by the regional ethical review board (dnr 2013/620). Mechanical imaging readings were acquired of the symptomatic breast. The relative mean pressure on the suspicious area (RMPA) was defined and a threshold for malignancy was established. RESULTS: Biopsy-proven invasive cancers had a median RMPA of 3.0 (interquartile range (IQR) = 3.7), significantly different from biopsy-proven benign at 1.3 (IQR = 1.0) and non-biopsied cases at 1.0 (IQR = 1.3) (P < 0.001). The lowest RMPA for invasive cancer was 1.4, with 23 biopsy-proven benign and 33 non-biopsied cases being below this limit. Had these women not been recalled, recall rates would have been reduced by 36% and biopsy rates by 32%. CONCLUSIONS: If implemented in a screening situation, this may substantially lower the number of false positives. KEY POINTS: • Mechanical imaging is used as an adjunct to mammography in breast screening. • A threshold pressure can be established for malignant breast cancer. • Recalls and biopsies can be substantially reduced. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5491561 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-54915612017-07-13 Can mechanical imaging increase the specificity of mammography screening? Dustler, Magnus Förnvik, Daniel Timberg, Pontus Andersson, Ingvar Petersson, Hannie Brorson, Håkan Tingberg, Anders Zackrisson, Sophia Eur Radiol Breast OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate the effects of adding adjunct mechanical imaging to mammography breast screening. We hypothesized that mechanical imaging could detect increased local pressure caused by both malignant and benign breast lesions and that a pressure threshold for malignancy could be established. The impact of this on breast screening was investigated with regard to reductions in recall and biopsy rates. METHODS: 155 women recalled from breast screening were included in the study, which was approved by the regional ethical review board (dnr 2013/620). Mechanical imaging readings were acquired of the symptomatic breast. The relative mean pressure on the suspicious area (RMPA) was defined and a threshold for malignancy was established. RESULTS: Biopsy-proven invasive cancers had a median RMPA of 3.0 (interquartile range (IQR) = 3.7), significantly different from biopsy-proven benign at 1.3 (IQR = 1.0) and non-biopsied cases at 1.0 (IQR = 1.3) (P < 0.001). The lowest RMPA for invasive cancer was 1.4, with 23 biopsy-proven benign and 33 non-biopsied cases being below this limit. Had these women not been recalled, recall rates would have been reduced by 36% and biopsy rates by 32%. CONCLUSIONS: If implemented in a screening situation, this may substantially lower the number of false positives. KEY POINTS: • Mechanical imaging is used as an adjunct to mammography in breast screening. • A threshold pressure can be established for malignant breast cancer. • Recalls and biopsies can be substantially reduced. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017-01-20 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5491561/ /pubmed/28108837 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4723-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Breast Dustler, Magnus Förnvik, Daniel Timberg, Pontus Andersson, Ingvar Petersson, Hannie Brorson, Håkan Tingberg, Anders Zackrisson, Sophia Can mechanical imaging increase the specificity of mammography screening? |
title | Can mechanical imaging increase the specificity of mammography screening? |
title_full | Can mechanical imaging increase the specificity of mammography screening? |
title_fullStr | Can mechanical imaging increase the specificity of mammography screening? |
title_full_unstemmed | Can mechanical imaging increase the specificity of mammography screening? |
title_short | Can mechanical imaging increase the specificity of mammography screening? |
title_sort | can mechanical imaging increase the specificity of mammography screening? |
topic | Breast |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5491561/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28108837 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4723-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dustlermagnus canmechanicalimagingincreasethespecificityofmammographyscreening AT fornvikdaniel canmechanicalimagingincreasethespecificityofmammographyscreening AT timbergpontus canmechanicalimagingincreasethespecificityofmammographyscreening AT anderssoningvar canmechanicalimagingincreasethespecificityofmammographyscreening AT peterssonhannie canmechanicalimagingincreasethespecificityofmammographyscreening AT brorsonhakan canmechanicalimagingincreasethespecificityofmammographyscreening AT tingberganders canmechanicalimagingincreasethespecificityofmammographyscreening AT zackrissonsophia canmechanicalimagingincreasethespecificityofmammographyscreening |