Cargando…

Effect of Different Types of Mammography Equipment on Screening Outcomes: A Report by the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of different types of mammography equipment on screening outcomes by comparing the performance of film-screen mammography (FSM), computed radiography mammography (CRM), and digital mammography (DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 128756 sets...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Choi, Bo Hwa, Lee, Eun Hye, Jun, Jae Kwan, Kim, Keum Won, Park, Young Mi, Kim, Hye-Won, Kim, You Me, Shin, Dong Rock, Lim, Hyo Soon, Park, Jeong Seon, Kim, Hye Jung
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Society of Radiology 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6923210/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31854151
http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2019.0006
_version_ 1783481483621564416
author Choi, Bo Hwa
Lee, Eun Hye
Jun, Jae Kwan
Kim, Keum Won
Park, Young Mi
Kim, Hye-Won
Kim, You Me
Shin, Dong Rock
Lim, Hyo Soon
Park, Jeong Seon
Kim, Hye Jung
author_facet Choi, Bo Hwa
Lee, Eun Hye
Jun, Jae Kwan
Kim, Keum Won
Park, Young Mi
Kim, Hye-Won
Kim, You Me
Shin, Dong Rock
Lim, Hyo Soon
Park, Jeong Seon
Kim, Hye Jung
author_sort Choi, Bo Hwa
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of different types of mammography equipment on screening outcomes by comparing the performance of film-screen mammography (FSM), computed radiography mammography (CRM), and digital mammography (DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 128756 sets of mammograms from 10 hospitals participating in the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea between 2005 and 2010. We compared the diagnostic accuracy of the types of mammography equipment by analyzing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with a 95% confidence interval (CI); performance indicators, including recall rate, cancer detection rate (CDR), positive predictive value(1) (PPV(1)), sensitivity, specificity, and interval cancer rate (ICR); and the types of breast cancer pathology. RESULTS: The AUCs were 0.898 (95% CI, 0.878–0.919) in DM, 0.860 (0.815–0.905) in FSM, and 0.866 (0.828–0.903) in CRM (p = 0.150). DM showed better performance than FSM and CRM in terms of the recall rate (14.8 vs. 24.8 and 19.8%), CDR (3.4 vs. 2.2 and 2.1 per 1000 examinations), PPV(1) (2.3 vs. 0.9 and 1.1%), and specificity (85.5 vs. 75.3 and 80.3%) (p < 0.001) but not in terms of sensitivity (86.3 vs. 87.4 and 86.3%) and ICR (0.6 vs. 0.4 and 0.4). The proportions of carcinoma in situ (CIS) were 27.5%, 13.6%, and 11.8% for DM, CRM, and FSM, respectively (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: In comparison to FSM and CRM, DM showed better performance in terms of the recall rate, CDR, PPV(1), and specificity, although the AUCs were similar, and more CISs were detected using DM. The application of DM may help to improve the quality of mammography screenings. However, the overdiagnosis issue of CIS using DM should be evaluated.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6923210
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher The Korean Society of Radiology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69232102019-12-30 Effect of Different Types of Mammography Equipment on Screening Outcomes: A Report by the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea Choi, Bo Hwa Lee, Eun Hye Jun, Jae Kwan Kim, Keum Won Park, Young Mi Kim, Hye-Won Kim, You Me Shin, Dong Rock Lim, Hyo Soon Park, Jeong Seon Kim, Hye Jung Korean J Radiol Breast Imaging OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of different types of mammography equipment on screening outcomes by comparing the performance of film-screen mammography (FSM), computed radiography mammography (CRM), and digital mammography (DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 128756 sets of mammograms from 10 hospitals participating in the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea between 2005 and 2010. We compared the diagnostic accuracy of the types of mammography equipment by analyzing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with a 95% confidence interval (CI); performance indicators, including recall rate, cancer detection rate (CDR), positive predictive value(1) (PPV(1)), sensitivity, specificity, and interval cancer rate (ICR); and the types of breast cancer pathology. RESULTS: The AUCs were 0.898 (95% CI, 0.878–0.919) in DM, 0.860 (0.815–0.905) in FSM, and 0.866 (0.828–0.903) in CRM (p = 0.150). DM showed better performance than FSM and CRM in terms of the recall rate (14.8 vs. 24.8 and 19.8%), CDR (3.4 vs. 2.2 and 2.1 per 1000 examinations), PPV(1) (2.3 vs. 0.9 and 1.1%), and specificity (85.5 vs. 75.3 and 80.3%) (p < 0.001) but not in terms of sensitivity (86.3 vs. 87.4 and 86.3%) and ICR (0.6 vs. 0.4 and 0.4). The proportions of carcinoma in situ (CIS) were 27.5%, 13.6%, and 11.8% for DM, CRM, and FSM, respectively (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: In comparison to FSM and CRM, DM showed better performance in terms of the recall rate, CDR, PPV(1), and specificity, although the AUCs were similar, and more CISs were detected using DM. The application of DM may help to improve the quality of mammography screenings. However, the overdiagnosis issue of CIS using DM should be evaluated. The Korean Society of Radiology 2019-12 2019-11-05 /pmc/articles/PMC6923210/ /pubmed/31854151 http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2019.0006 Text en Copyright © 2019 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
Choi, Bo Hwa
Lee, Eun Hye
Jun, Jae Kwan
Kim, Keum Won
Park, Young Mi
Kim, Hye-Won
Kim, You Me
Shin, Dong Rock
Lim, Hyo Soon
Park, Jeong Seon
Kim, Hye Jung
Effect of Different Types of Mammography Equipment on Screening Outcomes: A Report by the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea
title Effect of Different Types of Mammography Equipment on Screening Outcomes: A Report by the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea
title_full Effect of Different Types of Mammography Equipment on Screening Outcomes: A Report by the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea
title_fullStr Effect of Different Types of Mammography Equipment on Screening Outcomes: A Report by the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea
title_full_unstemmed Effect of Different Types of Mammography Equipment on Screening Outcomes: A Report by the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea
title_short Effect of Different Types of Mammography Equipment on Screening Outcomes: A Report by the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea
title_sort effect of different types of mammography equipment on screening outcomes: a report by the alliance for breast cancer screening in korea
topic Breast Imaging
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6923210/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31854151
http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2019.0006
work_keys_str_mv AT choibohwa effectofdifferenttypesofmammographyequipmentonscreeningoutcomesareportbytheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT leeeunhye effectofdifferenttypesofmammographyequipmentonscreeningoutcomesareportbytheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT junjaekwan effectofdifferenttypesofmammographyequipmentonscreeningoutcomesareportbytheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT kimkeumwon effectofdifferenttypesofmammographyequipmentonscreeningoutcomesareportbytheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT parkyoungmi effectofdifferenttypesofmammographyequipmentonscreeningoutcomesareportbytheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT kimhyewon effectofdifferenttypesofmammographyequipmentonscreeningoutcomesareportbytheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT kimyoume effectofdifferenttypesofmammographyequipmentonscreeningoutcomesareportbytheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT shindongrock effectofdifferenttypesofmammographyequipmentonscreeningoutcomesareportbytheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT limhyosoon effectofdifferenttypesofmammographyequipmentonscreeningoutcomesareportbytheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT parkjeongseon effectofdifferenttypesofmammographyequipmentonscreeningoutcomesareportbytheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT kimhyejung effectofdifferenttypesofmammographyequipmentonscreeningoutcomesareportbytheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea
AT effectofdifferenttypesofmammographyequipmentonscreeningoutcomesareportbytheallianceforbreastcancerscreeninginkorea