Clinical performance metrics of 3D digital breast tomosynthesis compared with 2D digital mammography for breast cancer screening in community practice.

OBJECTIVE The objective of our study was to assess the clinical performance of combined 2D-3D digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), referred to as "3D DBT," compared with 2D digital mammography (DM) alone for screening mammography in a community-based radiology practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS Performance outcomes measures were assessed for 14 radiologists who interpreted more than 500 screening mammography 3D DBT studies after the initiation of tomosynthesis. Outcomes from screening mammography during the study period between August 9, 2011, and November 30, 2012, using 3D DBT (n = 23,149 patients) versus 2D DM (n = 54,684 patients) were compared. RESULTS For patients screened with 3D DBT, the relative change in recall rate was 16.1% lower than for patients screened with 2D DM (p > 0.0001). The overall cancer detection rate (CDR), expressed as number of cancers per 1000 patients screened, was 28.6% greater (p = 0.035) for 3D DBT (6.3/1000) compared with 2D DM (4.9/1000). The CDR for invasive cancers with 3D DBT (4.6/1000) was 43.8% higher (p = 0.0056) than with 2D DM (3.2/1000). The positive predictive value for recalls from screening (PPV1) was 53.3% greater (p = 0.0003) for 3D DBT (4.6%) compared with 2D DM (3.0%). No significant difference in the positive predictive value for biopsy (PPV3) was found for 3D DBT versus 2D DM (22.8% and 23.8%, respectively) (p = 0.696). CONCLUSION In community-based radiology practice, mammography screening with 3D DBT yielded lower recall rates, an increased CDR for cancer overall, and an increased CDR for invasive cancer compared with 2D DM. The PPV1 was significantly greater in the group screened using 3D DBT.

[1]  D. Kopans.  "Off Label" Use of FDA-Approved Devices and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis. , 2015, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[2]  Tor D Tosteson,et al.  Digital breast tomosynthesis: initial experience in 98 women with abnormal digital screening mammography. , 2007, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[3]  Laurie L Fajardo,et al.  Cancer cases from ACRIN digital mammographic imaging screening trial: radiologist analysis with use of a logistic regression model. , 2009, Radiology.

[4]  Madhavi Raghu,et al.  Comparison of tomosynthesis plus digital mammography and digital mammography alone for breast cancer screening. , 2013, Radiology.

[5]  E. Halpern,et al.  Assessing radiologist performance using combined digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis compared with digital mammography alone: results of a multicenter, multireader trial. , 2013, Radiology.

[6]  M. Javitt.  Section editor's notebook. Breast density and breast cancer risk-eyes wide open. , 2015, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[7]  Gisella Gennaro,et al.  Digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography: a clinical performance study , 2010, European Radiology.

[8]  L. Hardesty.  Issues to consider before implementing digital breast tomosynthesis into a breast imaging practice. , 2015, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[9]  Andriy I. Bandos,et al.  Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a population-based screening program. , 2013, Radiology.

[10]  S. Ciatto,et al.  Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomosynthesis for population breast-cancer screening (STORM): a prospective comparison study. , 2013, The Lancet. Oncology.

[11]  Bonnie N Joe,et al.  Breast density legislation: mandatory disclosure to patients, alternative screening, billing, reimbursement. , 2015, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[12]  M. Javitt.  Reply to "Supporting informed choice before screening mammography is the only ethical option". , 2014, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[13]  E. Mendelson,et al.  Training and standards for performance, interpretation, and structured reporting for supplemental breast cancer screening. , 2015, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[14]  C A Kelsey,et al.  Effects of age, breast density, ethnicity, and estrogen replacement therapy on screening mammographic sensitivity and cancer stage at diagnosis: review of 183,134 screening mammograms in Albuquerque, New Mexico. , 1998, Radiology.

[15]  Federica Zanca,et al.  Two-view and single-view tomosynthesis versus full-field digital mammography: high-resolution X-ray imaging observer study. , 2012, Radiology.

[16]  Anne Marie Murphy,et al.  Beyond the mammography quality standards act: measuring the quality of breast cancer screening programs. , 2014, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[17]  David Gur,et al.  Digital breast tomosynthesis: observer performance study. , 2009, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[18]  S. Rose,et al.  Implementation of breast tomosynthesis in a routine screening practice: an observational study. , 2013, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.