Concordance of breast imaging reporting and data system assessments and management recommendations in screening mammography.

PURPOSE To examine how frequently Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) mammographic screening assessments were associated with expected clinical management recommendations. MATERIALS AND METHODS Seven Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium mammography registries recorded screening assessments and recommendations in 1997 to identify the proportion of women in each BI-RADS category. The first screening assessment for a woman without cancer or a prior mammogram within 9 months was associated with its independently recorded recommendation. RESULTS Among 292,795 women, screening assessments included 269,022 (91.9%) with a "negative" or "benign finding," and 267,103 (99.3%) of these women were recommended for normal interval follow-up. Among 11,861 (4.1%) women with screening assessments of "probably benign finding," 4,782 (40.3%) were recommended for short interval follow-up as expected on the basis of the BI-RADS, but a high proportion (36.9%) were recommended for additional imaging. Among 1,625 (0.6%) women with "suspicious abnormality," most were recommended for biopsy (48.7%) or clinical examination and/or surgical consult (9.0%), but many were recommended for additional imaging (38.7%). Among 243 (0.1%) women with screening assessments "highly suggestive of malignancy," a majority were recommended for biopsy (73.3%) or clinical examination and/or surgical consult (18.1%) consistent with BI-RADS, but some were recommended for additional imaging (6.6%). CONCLUSION BI-RADS assessments and management recommendations are consistent for negative and benign assessments, but inconsistencies were found in assessments and recommendations for mammographic abnormalities.

[1]  L. Tabár,et al.  The Swedish Two-County Trial twenty years later. Updated mortality results and new insights from long-term follow-up. , 2000, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[2]  P. Langenberg,et al.  Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: inter- and intraobserver variability in feature analysis and final assessment. , 2000, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[3]  E. Sickles Probably benign breast lesions: when should follow-up be recommended and what is the optimal follow-up protocol? , 1999, Radiology.

[4]  S. Orel,et al.  BI-RADS categorization as a predictor of malignancy. , 1999, Radiology.

[5]  M. Nadel,et al.  Coding mammograms using the classification "probably benign finding--short interval follow-up suggested". , 1999, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[6]  L. Liberman,et al.  US-guided core breast biopsy: use and cost-effectiveness. , 1998, Radiology.

[7]  K. Kerlikowske,et al.  Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium: a national mammography screening and outcomes database. , 1997, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[8]  E A Sickles,et al.  Management of probably benign breast lesions. , 1995, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[9]  R. Smith,et al.  The mammography audit: a primer for the mammography quality standards act (MQSA). , 1995, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[10]  E. Sickles Probably Benign Breast Nodules: Follow-up of All Cases Requires Initial Full Problem-solving Imaging , 1995 .

[11]  F. Hall Probably benign breast nodules: follow-up of selected cases without initial full problem-solving imaging. , 1995, Radiology.

[12]  S. Rubin,et al.  Efficacy of screening mammography. A meta-analysis. , 1995, JAMA.