Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk
- PMID: 22474203
- PMCID: PMC3891886
- DOI: 10.1001/jama.2012.388
Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk
Abstract
Context: Annual ultrasound screening may detect small, node-negative breast cancers that are not seen on mammography. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may reveal additional breast cancers missed by both mammography and ultrasound screening.
Objective: To determine supplemental cancer detection yield of ultrasound and MRI in women at elevated risk for breast cancer.
Design, setting, and participants: From April 2004-February 2006, 2809 women at 21 sites with elevated cancer risk and dense breasts consented to 3 annual independent screens with mammography and ultrasound in randomized order. After 3 rounds of both screenings, 612 of 703 women who chose to undergo an MRI had complete data. The reference standard was defined as a combination of pathology (biopsy results that showed in situ or infiltrating ductal carcinoma or infiltrating lobular carcinoma in the breast or axillary lymph nodes) and 12-month follow-up.
Main outcome measures: Cancer detection rate (yield), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV3) of biopsies performed and interval cancer rate.
Results: A total of 2662 women underwent 7473 mammogram and ultrasound screenings, 110 of whom had 111 breast cancer events: 33 detected by mammography only, 32 by ultrasound only, 26 by both, and 9 by MRI after mammography plus ultrasound; 11 were not detected by any imaging screen. Among 4814 incidence screens in the second and third years combined, 75 women were diagnosed with cancer. Supplemental incidence-screening ultrasound identified 3.7 cancers per 1000 screens (95% CI, 2.1-5.8; P < .001). Sensitivity for mammography plus ultrasound was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.65-0.85); specificity, 0.84 (95% CI, 0.83-0.85); and PPV3, 0.16 (95% CI, 0.12-0.21). For mammography alone, sensitivity was 0.52 (95% CI, 0.40-0.64); specificity, 0.91 (95% CI, 0.90-0.92); and PPV3, 0.38 (95% CI, 0.28-0.49; P < .001 all comparisons). Of the MRI participants, 16 women (2.6%) had breast cancer diagnosed. The supplemental yield of MRI was 14.7 per 1000 (95% CI, 3.5-25.9; P = .004). Sensitivity for MRI and mammography plus ultrasound was 1.00 (95% CI, 0.79-1.00); specificity, 0.65 (95% CI, 0.61-0.69); and PPV3, 0.19 (95% CI, 0.11-0.29). For mammography and ultrasound, sensitivity was 0.44 (95% CI, 0.20-0.70, P = .004); specificity 0.84 (95% CI, 0.81-0.87; P < .001); and PPV3, 0.18 (95% CI, 0.08 to 0.34; P = .98). The number of screens needed to detect 1 cancer was 127 (95% CI, 99-167) for mammography; 234 (95% CI, 173-345) for supplemental ultrasound; and 68 (95% CI, 39-286) for MRI after negative mammography and ultrasound results.
Conclusion: The addition of screening ultrasound or MRI to mammography in women at increased risk of breast cancer resulted in not only a higher cancer detection yield but also an increase in false-positive findings.
Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00072501.
Figures
Comment in
-
Supplementary imaging for breast cancer screening in high-risk women.JAMA. 2012 Jul 18;308(3):236; author reply 236-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.7545. JAMA. 2012. PMID: 22797633 No abstract available.
-
Supplementary imaging for breast cancer screening in high-risk women.JAMA. 2012 Jul 18;308(3):236; author reply 236-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.7547. JAMA. 2012. PMID: 22797634 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer.JAMA. 2008 May 14;299(18):2151-63. doi: 10.1001/jama.299.18.2151. JAMA. 2008. PMID: 18477782 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Supplemental Screening for Breast Cancer in Women With Dense Breasts: A Systematic Review for the U.S. Preventive Service Task Force [Internet].Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2016 Jan. Report No.: 14-05201-EF-3. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2016 Jan. Report No.: 14-05201-EF-3. PMID: 26866210 Free Books & Documents. Review.
-
Breast Cancer Screening With Mammography Plus Ultrasonography or Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Women 50 Years or Younger at Diagnosis and Treated With Breast Conservation Therapy.JAMA Oncol. 2017 Nov 1;3(11):1495-1502. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.1256. JAMA Oncol. 2017. PMID: 28655029 Free PMC article.
-
Supplemental MRI Screening for Women with Extremely Dense Breast Tissue.N Engl J Med. 2019 Nov 28;381(22):2091-2102. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1903986. N Engl J Med. 2019. PMID: 31774954 Clinical Trial.
-
Mammography in combination with breast ultrasonography versus mammography for breast cancer screening in women at average risk.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Mar 31;3(3):CD009632. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009632.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023. PMID: 36999589 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Tumor-derived EV miRNA signatures surpass total EV miRNA in supplementing mammography for precision breast cancer diagnosis.Theranostics. 2024 Oct 7;14(17):6587-6604. doi: 10.7150/thno.99245. eCollection 2024. Theranostics. 2024. PMID: 39479442 Free PMC article.
-
Field cycling imaging to characterise breast cancer at low and ultra-low magnetic fields below 0.2 T.Commun Med (Lond). 2024 Oct 30;4(1):221. doi: 10.1038/s43856-024-00644-2. Commun Med (Lond). 2024. PMID: 39478081 Free PMC article.
-
Grating-based phase-contrast computed tomography for breast tissue at an inverse compton source.Sci Rep. 2024 Oct 26;14(1):25576. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-77346-1. Sci Rep. 2024. PMID: 39462058 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of Visual and Quantra Software Mammographic Density Assessment According to BI-RADS® in 2D and 3D Images.J Imaging. 2024 Sep 23;10(9):238. doi: 10.3390/jimaging10090238. J Imaging. 2024. PMID: 39330458 Free PMC article.
-
Preliminary study on DCE-MRI radiomics analysis for differentiation of HER2-low and HER2-zero breast cancer.Front Oncol. 2024 Aug 15;14:1385352. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1385352. eCollection 2024. Front Oncol. 2024. PMID: 39211554 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Buchberger W, Niehoff A, Obrist P, DeKoekkoek-Doll P, Dunser M. Clinically and mammographically occult breast lesions: detection and classification with high-resolution sonography. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2000;21(4):325–336. - PubMed
-
- Crystal P, Strano SD, Shcharynski S, Koretz MJ. Using sonography to screen women with mammographically dense breasts. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003 Jul;181(1):177–182. - PubMed
-
- Gordon PB, Goldenberg SL. Malignant breast masses detected only by ultrasound. A retrospective review [see comments] Cancer. 1995;76(4):626–630. - PubMed
-
- Kaplan SS. Clinical utility of bilateral whole-breast US in the evaluation of women with dense breast tissue. Radiology. 2001 Dec;221(3):641–649. - PubMed
-
- Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: An analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology. 2002 Oct;225(1):165–175. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous
