Breast cancer screening results 5 years after introduction of digital mammography in a population-based screening program.

PURPOSE To compare full-field digital mammography (FFDM) using computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) with screen-film mammography (SFM) in a population-based breast cancer screening program for initial and subsequent screening examinations. MATERIALS AND METHODS The study was approved by the regional medical ethics review board. Informed consent was not required. In a breast cancer screening facility, two of seven conventional mammography units were replaced with FFDM units. Digital mammograms were interpreted by using soft-copy reading with CAD. The same team of radiologists was involved in the double reading of FFDM and SFM images, with differences of opinion resolved in consensus. After 5 years, screening outcomes obtained with both modalities were compared for initial and subsequent screening examination findings. RESULTS A total of 367,600 screening examinations were performed, of which 56,518 were digital. Breast cancer was detected in 1927 women (317 with FFDM). At initial screenings, the cancer detection rate was .77% with FFDM and .62% with SFM. At subsequent screenings, detection rates were .55% and .49%, respectively. Differences were not statistically significant. Recalls based on microcalcifications alone doubled with FFDM. A significant increase in the detection of ductal carcinoma in situ was found with FFDM (P < .01). The fraction of invasive cancers with microcalcifications as the only sign of malignancy increased significantly, from 8.1% to 15.8% (P < .001). Recall rates were significantly higher with FFDM in the initial round (4.4% vs 2.3%, P < .001) and in the subsequent round (1.7% vs 1.2%, P < .001). CONCLUSION With the FFDM-CAD combination, detection performance is at least as good as that with SFM. The detection of ductal carcinoma in situ and microcalcification clusters improved with FFDM using CAD, while the recall rate increased.

[1]  Nico Karssemeijer,et al.  Importance of comparison of current and prior mammograms in breast cancer screening. , 2007, Radiology.

[2]  J M Lewin,et al.  Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinations. , 2001, Radiology.

[3]  Boel Heddson,et al.  Digital versus screen-film mammography: a retrospective comparison in a population-based screening program. , 2007, European journal of radiology.

[4]  Stefano Ciatto,et al.  Full-field digital versus screen-film mammography: comparative accuracy in concurrent screening cohorts. , 2007, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[5]  P. Skaane Studies comparing screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography in breast cancer screening: Updated review , 2009, Acta radiologica.

[6]  Jean B. Cormack,et al.  Diagnostic accuracy of digital versus film mammography: exploratory analysis of selected population subgroups in DMIST. , 2008, Radiology.

[7]  P. Skaane,et al.  Randomized trial of screen-film versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading in population-based screening program: follow-up and final results of Oslo II study. , 2007, Radiology.

[8]  Nico Karssemeijer,et al.  Effect of recall rate on earlier screen detection of breast cancers based on the Dutch performance indicators. , 2005, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[9]  H. D. de Koning,et al.  Nation‐wide breast cancer screening in The Netherlands: Results of initial and subsequent screening 1990–1995 , 1998, International journal of cancer.

[10]  P. Skaane,et al.  Full-field digital mammography compared to screen film mammography in the prevalent round of a population-based screening programme: the Vestfold County Study , 2007, European Radiology.

[11]  C. D'Orsi,et al.  Diagnostic Performance of Digital Versus Film Mammography for Breast-Cancer Screening , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.

[12]  S. Astley,et al.  Single reading with computer-aided detection for screening mammography. , 2008, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  L. Tabár,et al.  The relative contributions of screen-detected in situ and invasive breast carcinomas in reducing mortality from the disease. , 2003, European journal of cancer.

[14]  Per Skaane,et al.  Population-based mammography screening: comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading--Oslo I study. , 2003, Radiology.