Scholarlink

Purpose <p>Compare the radiological characteristics of screening images preceding interval cancers that occurred in women screened with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) plus digital mammography (DM) vs. those in women screened with DM alone.</p> Materials and methods <p>From two randomized trials comparing DBT + DM vs. DM, 91 (43 from DBT + DM arm and 48 from DM arm) images preceding interval cancers and 190 (94 and 96, respectively) negative controls were reviewed by three radiologists using only DM screening mammograms and by three different radiologists using all available images, i.e. DBT and DM for the experimental arm and DM for the standard arm. The cancers were classified according to the number of reviewers that found abnormalities, as true negative (negative for all three reviewers), minimal sign (positive for one and negative for two), and false negative (positive for two or three reviewers).</p> Results <p>In the DM arm, interval cancers were classified as true negative in 29–42%, minimal signs in 31–35%, and false negative in 27–35%; in the DBT arm, the proportion of true negative was 40%, minimal signs 21%, and false negatives 40% when the review was performed using only DM images, 30%, 28%, and 42% when the reviewers read both DBT and DM screening images. The differences were compatible with random fluctuations.</p> Conclusion <p>The radiological analysis of interval cancers after DBT + DM and after DM alone showed similar characteristics, confirming that the impact of DBT on interval cancer incidence is small both in terms of quantity and type.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Radiological review of interval breast cancers following screening with DBT + DM or DM: results from MAITA project randomized trials

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年8月4日

查看全文
  • Valentina Iotti,
  • Alfonso Frigerio,
  • Pamela Mancuso,
  • Daniela Ambrogetti,
  • Fabio Falcini,
  • Vladimiro Ginocchi,
  • Axel Graewingholt,
  • Kristina Lang,
  • Vincenzo Marra,
  • Manuela Pescarolo,
  • Giovanna Romanucci,
  • Claudia Rossati,
  • Gabriele Rossini,
  • Francesco Sardanelli,
  • Rita Vacondio,
  • Cinzia Campari,
  • Patrizia Falini,
  • Francesca Fornasa,
  • Paola Mantellini,
  • Stefania Montemezzi,
  • Andrea Nitrosi,
  • Pierpaolo Pattacini,
  • Francesca Peruzzi,
  • Antonio Ponti,
  • Paola Armaroli,
  • Paolo Giorgi Rossi,
  • Chiara Coriani,
  • Gloria Stefanelli,
  • Giulio Tondelli,
  • Filippo Beretti,
  • Sabrina Caffarri,
  • Vanessa Marchesi,
  • Laura Canovi,
  • Marco Colli,
  • Mirco Boschini,
  • Marco Bertolini,
  • Moira Ragazzi,
  • Sara Ravaioli,
  • Stefania Caroli,
  • Luca Braglia,
  • Olivera Djuric,
  • Francesco Venturelli,
  • Massimo Vicentini,
  • Maria Barbara Braghiroli,
  • Elena Davoli,
  • Ilaria Lucchi,
  • Gessica Martello,
  • Anna Iossa,
  • Eva Carnesciali,
  • Vincenzo Mazzalupo,
  • Donella Puliti,
  • Marco Zappa,
  • Francesca Battisti,
  • Noemi Auzzi,
  • Simona Verdi,
  • Carolina Degl’Innocenti,
  • Daniela Tramalloni,
  • Elena Cavazza,
  • Simone Busoni,
  • Elisa Betti,
  • Francesco Regini,
  • Giovanni Di Leo,
  • Luca Alessandro Carbonaro,
  • Veronica Magni,
  • Andrea Cozzi,
  • Diana Spinelli,
  • Cristian Giuseppe Monaco,
  • Simone Schiaffino,
  • Adrienn Benedek,
  • Laura Menicagli,
  • Raffaella Ferraris,
  • Elisabetta Favettini,
  • Davide Dettori,
  • Paolo Falco,
  • Pietro Presti,
  • Nereo Segnan,
  • Loredana Correale,
  • Livia Giordano,
  • Luisella Milanesio,
  • Franca Artuso,
  • Aurora Di Leo,
  • Isabella Castellano,
  • Emilia Riggi,
  • Denise Casella,
  • Sabina Pitarella,
  • Viviana Vergini,
  • Michele Amadori,
  • Stephen W. Duffy

摘要

Purpose

Compare the radiological characteristics of screening images preceding interval cancers that occurred in women screened with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) plus digital mammography (DM) vs. those in women screened with DM alone.

Materials and methods

From two randomized trials comparing DBT + DM vs. DM, 91 (43 from DBT + DM arm and 48 from DM arm) images preceding interval cancers and 190 (94 and 96, respectively) negative controls were reviewed by three radiologists using only DM screening mammograms and by three different radiologists using all available images, i.e. DBT and DM for the experimental arm and DM for the standard arm. The cancers were classified according to the number of reviewers that found abnormalities, as true negative (negative for all three reviewers), minimal sign (positive for one and negative for two), and false negative (positive for two or three reviewers).

Results

In the DM arm, interval cancers were classified as true negative in 29–42%, minimal signs in 31–35%, and false negative in 27–35%; in the DBT arm, the proportion of true negative was 40%, minimal signs 21%, and false negatives 40% when the review was performed using only DM images, 30%, 28%, and 42% when the reviewers read both DBT and DM screening images. The differences were compatible with random fluctuations.

Conclusion

The radiological analysis of interval cancers after DBT + DM and after DM alone showed similar characteristics, confirming that the impact of DBT on interval cancer incidence is small both in terms of quantity and type.