SwePub
Sök i LIBRIS databas

  Extended search

WFRF:(Aase Hildegunn S.)
 

Search: WFRF:(Aase Hildegunn S.) > (2024) > Digital breast tomo...

  • 1 of 1
  • Previous record
  • Next record
  •    To hitlist

Digital breast tomosynthesis in mammographic screening : false negative cancer cases in the To-Be 1 trial

Moshina, Nataliia (author)
Cancer Registry of Norway, Institute of Population-Based Cancer Research
Gräwingholt, Axel (author)
Mammographie screening-Zentrum Paderborn
Lång, Kristina (author)
Lund University,Lunds universitet,Diagnostisk radiologi, Malmö,Forskargrupper vid Lunds universitet,LUCC: Lunds universitets cancercentrum,Övriga starka forskningsmiljöer,Radiology Diagnostics, Malmö,Lund University Research Groups,LUCC: Lund University Cancer Centre,Other Strong Research Environments
show more...
Mann, Ritse (author)
Radboud University Medical Center,Netherlands Cancer Institute
Hovda, Tone (author)
Vestre Viken Hospital Trust
Hoff, Solveig Roth (author)
Norwegian University of Science and Technology
Skaane, Per (author)
Oslo university hospital
Lee, Christoph I. (author)
Washington University School of Medicine,University of Washington
Aase, Hildegunn S. (author)
Haukeland University Hospital
Aslaksen, Aslak B. (author)
Haukeland University Hospital
Hofvind, Solveig (author)
UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø,Cancer Registry of Norway, Institute of Population-Based Cancer Research
show less...
 (creator_code:org_t)
2024
2024
English.
In: Insights into Imaging. - 1869-4101. ; 15:1
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)
Abstract Subject headings
Close  
  • Objectives: The randomized controlled trial comparing digital breast tomosynthesis and synthetic 2D mammograms (DBT + SM) versus digital mammography (DM) (the To-Be 1 trial), 2016–2017, did not result in higher cancer detection for DBT + SM. We aimed to determine if negative cases prior to interval and consecutive screen-detected cancers from DBT + SM were due to interpretive error. Methods: Five external breast radiologists performed the individual blinded review of 239 screening examinations (90 true negative, 39 false positive, 19 prior to interval cancer, and 91 prior to consecutive screen-detected cancer) and the informed consensus review of examinations prior to interval and screen-detected cancers (n = 110). The reviewers marked suspicious findings with a score of 1–5 (probability of malignancy). A case was false negative if ≥ 2 radiologists assigned the cancer site with a score of ≥ 2 in the blinded review and if the case was assigned as false negative by a consensus in the informed review. Results: In the informed review, 5.3% of examinations prior to interval cancer and 18.7% prior to consecutive round screen-detected cancer were considered false negative. In the blinded review, 10.6% of examinations prior to interval cancer and 42.9% prior to consecutive round screen-detected cancer were scored ≥ 2. A score of ≥ 2 was assigned to 47.8% of negative and 89.7% of false positive examinations. Conclusions: The false negative rates were consistent with those of prior DM reviews, indicating that the lack of higher cancer detection for DBT + SM versus DM in the To-Be 1 trial is complex and not due to interpretive error alone. Critical relevance statement: The randomized controlled trial on digital breast tomosynthesis and synthetic 2D mammograms (DBT) and digital mammography (DM), 2016–2017, showed no difference in cancer detection for the two techniques. The rates of false negative screening examinations prior to interval and consecutive screen-detected cancer for DBT were consistent with the rates in prior DM reviews, indicating that the non-superior DBT performance in the trial might not be due to interpretive error alone. Key points: • Screening with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) did not result in a higher breast cancer detection rate compared to screening with digital mammography (DM) in the To-Be 1 trial. • The false negative rates for examinations prior to interval and consecutive screen-detected cancer for DBT were determined in the trial to test if the lack of differences was due to interpretive error. • The false negative rates were consistent with those of prior DM reviews, indicating that the lack of higher cancer detection for DBT versus DM was complex and not due to interpretive error alone. Graphical Abstract: (Figure presented.)

Subject headings

MEDICIN OCH HÄLSOVETENSKAP  -- Klinisk medicin -- Cancer och onkologi (hsv//swe)
MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES  -- Clinical Medicine -- Cancer and Oncology (hsv//eng)

Keyword

Breast cancer
Digital breast tomosynthesis
Interval cancer
Mammographic screening
Screen-detected cancer

Publication and Content Type

art (subject category)
ref (subject category)

Find in a library

To the university's database

  • 1 of 1
  • Previous record
  • Next record
  •    To hitlist

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Close

Copy and save the link in order to return to this view