Search

Objectives: The randomized TOmosynthesis plus SYnthesized MAmmography (TOSYMA) screening trial has shown that digital breast tomosynthesis plus synthesized mammography (DBT + SM) is superior to digital mammography (DM) in invasive breast cancer detection varying with breast density. On the other hand, the overall average glandular dose (AGD) of DBT is higher than that of DM. Comparing the DBT + SM and DM trial arm, we analyzed here the mean AGD and their determinants per breast density category and related them to the respective invasive cancer detection rates (iCDR). Methods: TOSYMA screened 99,689 women aged 50 to 69 years. Compression force, resulting breast thickness, the calculated AGD obtained from each mammography device, and previously published iCDR were used for comparisons across breast density categories in the two trial arms. Results: There were 196,622 exposures of 49,227 women (DBT + SM) and 197,037 exposures of 49,132 women (DM) available for analyses. Mean breast thicknesses declined from breast density category A (fatty) to D (extremely dense) in both trial arms. However, while the mean AGD in the DBT + SM arm declined concomitantly from category A (2.41 mGy) to D (1.89 mGy), it remained almost unchanged in the DM arm (1.46 and 1.51 mGy, respectively). In relative terms, the AGD elevation in the DBT + SM arm (64.4% (A), by 44.5% (B), 27.8% (C), and 26.0% (D)) was lowest in dense breasts where, however, the highest iCDR were observed. Conclusion: Women with dense breasts may specifically benefit from DBT + SM screening as high cancer detection is achieved with only moderate AGD elevations. Clinical relevance statement: TOSYMA suggests a favorable constellation for screening with digital breast tomosynthesis plus synthesized mammography (DBT + SM) in dense breasts when weighing average glandular dose elevation against raised invasive breast cancer detection rates. There is potential for density-, i.e., risk-adapted population-wide breast cancer screening with DBT + SM. Key Points: Breast thickness declines with visually increasing density in digital mammography (DM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT). Average glandular doses of DBT decrease with increasing density; digital mammography shows lower and more constant values. With the smallest average glandular dose difference in dense breasts, DBT plus SM had the highest difference in invasive breast cancer detection rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To evaluate if artificial intelligence (AI) can discriminate recalled benign from recalled malignant mammographic screening abnormalities to improve screening performance. Methods: A total of 2257 full-field digital mammography screening examinations, obtained 2011–2013, of women aged 50–69 years which were recalled for further assessment of 295 malignant out of 305 truly malignant lesions and 2289 benign lesions after independent double-reading with arbitration, were included in this retrospective study. A deep learning AI system was used to obtain a score (0–95) for each recalled lesion, representing the likelihood of breast cancer. The sensitivity on the lesion level and the proportion of women without false-positive ratings (non-FPR) resulting under AI were estimated as a function of the classification cutoff and compared to that of human readers. Results: Using a cutoff of 1, AI decreased the proportion of women with false-positives from 89.9 to 62.0%, non-FPR 11.1% vs. 38.0% (difference 26.9%, 95% confidence interval 25.1–28.8%; p <.001), preventing 30.1% of reader-induced false-positive recalls, while reducing sensitivity from 96.7 to 91.1% (5.6%, 3.1–8.0%) as compared to human reading. The positive predictive value of recall (PPV-1) increased from 12.8 to 16.5% (3.7%, 3.5–4.0%). In women with mass-related lesions (n = 900), the non-FPR was 14.2% for humans vs. 36.7% for AI (22.4%, 19.8–25.3%) at a sensitivity of 98.5% vs. 97.1% (1.5%, 0–3.5%). Conclusion: The application of AI during consensus conference might especially help readers to reduce false-positive recalls of masses at the expense of a small sensitivity reduction. Prospective studies are needed to further evaluate the screening benefit of AI in practice. Key Points: • Integrating the use of artificial intelligence in the arbitration process reduces benign recalls and increases the positive predictive value of recall at the expense of some sensitivity loss. • Application of the artificial intelligence system to aid the decision to recall a woman seems particularly beneficial for masses, where the system reaches comparable sensitivity to that of the readers, but with considerably reduced false-positives. • About one-fourth of all recalled malignant lesions are not automatically marked by the system such that their evaluation (AI score) must be retrieved manually by the reader. A thorough reading of screening mammograms by readers to identify suspicious lesions therefore remains mandatory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Two dimensional (2D) full-field digital mammography is the current standard of breast cancer screening. Digital breast tomosynthesis generates pseudo-three dimensional datasets of the breast from which synthesised 2D (s2D) mammograms can be reconstructed. This innovative approach reduces the likelihood of overlapping breast tissues that can conceal features of malignancy. We aimed to compare digital breast tomosynthesis plus s2D mammography with digital screening mammography for the detection of invasive breast cancer.Methods: TOSYMA was a randomised, open-label, superiority trial done at 17 screening units in two federal states of Germany. Eligible participants were women aged 50-69 years who had been invited to participate in a population-wide, quality-controlled mammography screening programme. Women were randomly assigned (1:1) to digital breast tomosynthesis plus s2D mammography or digital mammography alone using block randomisation (block size of 32), stratified by site. The primary endpoints were the detection rate of invasive breast cancer and invasive interval cancer rate at 24 months, analysed in the modified full analysis set, which included all randomly assigned participants who underwent either type of screening examination. Ten examinations, corresponding to a second study participation, were excluded. Analyses were done according to the intention-to-treat principle. Interval cancer rates will be reported in the follow-up study. Safety was assessed in the as-treated population, which included all participants who were randomly assigned. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03377036, and is closed to accrual.Findings: Between July 5, 2018, and Dec 30, 2020, 99 689 women were randomly assigned to digital breast tomosynthesis plus s2D mammography (n=49 804) or digital mammography (n=49 830). Invasive breast cancers were detected in 354 of 49 715 women with evaluable primary endpoint data in the digital breast tomosynthesis plus s2D group (detection rate 7·1 cases per 1000 women screened) and in 240 of 49 762 women in the digital mammography group (4·8 cases per 1000 women screened; odds ratio 1·48 [95% CI 1·25-1·75]; p<0·0001). Adverse events and device deficiencies were rare (six adverse events in each group; 23 device deficiencies in the digital breast tomosynthesis plus s2D group vs five device deficiencies in the digital mammography group) and no serious adverse events were reported.Interpretation: The results from this study indicate that the detection rate for invasive breast cancer was significantly higher with digital breast tomosynthesis plus s2D mammography than digital mammography alone. Evaluation of interval cancer rates in the follow-up study will further help to investigate incremental long-term benefits of digital breast tomosynthesis screening.Funding: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]