Artigo Acesso aberto Revisado por pares

Accuracy of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Depicting Breast Cancer Subgroups in a UK Retrospective Reading Study (TOMMY Trial)

2015; Radiological Society of North America; Volume: 277; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1148/radiol.2015142566

ISSN

1527-1315

Autores

Fiona J. Gilbert, Lorraine Tucker, Maureen Gc Gillan, Paula Willsher, Julie Cooke, Karen A. Duncan, Michael Michell, H. Dobson, Yit Yoong Lim, Tamara Suaris, Susan Astley, Oliver Morrish, Kenneth C. Young, Stephen W. Duffy,

Tópico(s)

Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications

Resumo

Purpose To compare the diagnostic performance of two-dimensional (2D) mammography, 2D mammography plus digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), and synthetic 2D mammography plus DBT in depicting malignant radiographic features. Materials and Methods In this multicenter, multireader, retrospective reading study (the TOMMY trial), after written informed consent was obtained, 8869 women (age range, 29–85 years; mean, 56 years) were recruited from July 2011 to March 2013 in an ethically approved study. From these women, a reading dataset of 7060 cases was randomly allocated for independent blinded review of (a) 2D mammography images, (b) 2D mammography plus DBT images, and (c) synthetic 2D mammography plus DBT images. Reviewers had no access to results of previous examinations. Overall sensitivities and specificities were calculated for younger women and those with dense breasts. Results Overall sensitivity was 87% for 2D mammography, 89% for 2D mammography plus DBT, and 88% for synthetic 2D mammography plus DBT. The addition of DBT was associated with a 34% increase in the odds of depicting cancer (odds ratio [OR] = 1.34, P = .06); however, this level did not achieve significance. For patients aged 50–59 years old, sensitivity was significantly higher (P = .01) for 2D mammography plus DBT than it was for 2D mammography. For those with breast density of 50% or more, sensitivity was 86% for 2D mammography compared with 93% for 2D mammography plus DBT (P = .03). Specificity was 57% for 2D mammography, 70% for 2D mammography plus DBT, and 72% for synthetic 2D mammography plusmDBT. Specificity was significantly higher than 2D mammography (P < .001in both cases) and was observed for all subgroups (P < .001 for all cases). Conclusion The addition of DBT increased the sensitivity of 2D mammography in patients with dense breasts and the specificity of 2D mammography for all subgroups. The use of synthetic 2D DBT demonstrated performance similar to that of standard 2D mammography with DBT. DBT is of potential benefit to screening programs, particularly in younger women with dense breasts. © RSNA, 2015

Referência(s)