Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinations.

PURPOSE To prospectively compare full-field digital mammography (FFDM) with screen-film mammography (SFM) for cancer detection in a screening population. MATERIALS AND METHODS At two institutions, 4,945 FFDM examinations were performed in women aged 40 years and older presenting for SFM. Two views of each breast were acquired with each modality. SFM and FFDM images were interpreted independently. Findings detected with either SFM or FFDM were evaluated with additional imaging and, if warranted, biopsy. RESULTS Patients in the study underwent 152 biopsies, which resulted in the diagnosis of 35 breast cancers. Twenty-two cancers were detected with SFM and 21 with FFDM. Four were interval cancers that became palpable within 1 year of screening and were considered false-negative findings with both modalities. The difference in cancer detection rate was not significant. FFDM had a significantly lower recall rate (11.5%; 568 of 4,945) than SFM (13.8%; 685 of 4,945) (P <.001, McNemar chi(2) model; P <.03, generalized estimating equations model). The positive biopsy rate for findings detected with FFDM (30%; 21 of 69) was higher than that for findings detected with SFM (19%; 22 of 114), but this difference was not significant. CONCLUSION No difference in cancer detection rate has yet been observed between FFDM and SFM. FFDM has so far led to fewer recalls than SFM.

[1]  Andrew D. A. Maidment,et al.  Current status of full-field digital mammography. , 2000, Academic radiology.

[2]  E A Sickles,et al.  Quality assurance. How to audit your own mammography practice. , 1992, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[3]  Jo M. Kendrick,et al.  Quality Determinants of Mammography, Clinical Practice Guideline , 1995 .

[4]  E. Thurfjell,et al.  Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program. , 1994, Radiology.

[5]  J A Rowlands,et al.  X-ray detectors for digital radiography. , 1997, Physics in medicine and biology.

[6]  C. J. Kotre,et al.  The use of a contrast-detail test object in the optimization of optical density in mammography. , 1995, The British journal of radiology.

[7]  S Suryanarayanan,et al.  Full breast digital mammography with an amorphous silicon-based flat panel detector: physical characteristics of a clinical prototype. , 2000, Medical physics.

[8]  S L Zeger,et al.  Regression analysis for correlated data. , 1993, Annual review of public health.

[9]  J. Hanley,et al.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. , 1982, Radiology.

[10]  Robert M. Nishikawa,et al.  Development Of A Digital Mammography System , 1988, Medical Imaging.

[11]  C. Beam,et al.  Effect of human variability on independent double reading in screening mammography. , 1996, Academic radiology.

[12]  D. Chakraborty,et al.  Free-response methodology: alternate analysis and a new observer-performance experiment. , 1990, Radiology.

[13]  C Kimme-Smith,et al.  Establishing minimum performance standards, calibration intervals, and optimal exposure values for a whole breast digital mammography unit. , 1998, Medical physics.

[14]  B. Muir,et al.  The efficacy of double reading mammograms in breast screening. , 1994, Clinical radiology.

[15]  S. Siegel,et al.  Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[16]  Braman Dm,et al.  ACR accredited suburban mammography center. Three year results. , 1989 .

[17]  C L Robertson,et al.  A private breast imaging practice: medical audit of 25,788 screening and 1,077 diagnostic examinations. , 1993, Radiology.

[18]  D P Chakraborty,et al.  Maximum likelihood analysis of free-response receiver operating characteristic (FROC) data. , 1989, Medical physics.

[19]  Lynde Jl,et al.  Low-cost screening mammography: results of 21,141 consecutive examinations in a community program. , 1993 .

[20]  R. Bird,et al.  Low-cost screening mammography: report on finances and review of 21,716 consecutive cases. , 1989, Radiology.

[21]  R. Rosenberg,et al.  Improvement in mammography interpretation skills in a community radiology practice after dedicated teaching courses: 2-year medical audit of 38,633 cases. , 1992, Radiology.

[22]  K C Young,et al.  Mammographic film density and detection of small breast cancers. , 1994, Clinical radiology.

[23]  J. Hanley,et al.  A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. , 1983, Radiology.