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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dustler, Magnus, Förnvik, Daniel, Timberg, Pontus, Andersson, Ingvar, Petersson, Hannie, Brorson, Håkan, Tingberg, Anders, Zackrisson, Sophia
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