Literature DB >> 11304700

Diagnostic value of radiological breast imaging in a non-screening population.

K Flobbe1, E S van der Linden, A G Kessels, J M van Engelshoven.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of breast imaging in the diagnosis of breast cancer in a non-screening population. In a consecutive set of patients referred for mammography in one year, the results of palpation and radiological breast imaging were scored on a 5-point grading scale and linked to pathology as gold standard after a follow up period of one year. The diagnostic performance was studied by logistic regression analysis and ROC-curves. There were 1,944 breast examinations in 1,890 patients and 3,816 breasts. Pathology results reported 118 malignancies in 115 women. With a cut-off point between benign and uncertain benign a sensitivity of 89% and a specificity of 98% was found for radiological imaging. ROC-curves showed a significant increase in diagnostic performance when radiology was added to results of palpation and age (p = 0.007). Radiological imaging tests have a large diagnostic value in the detection of breast cancer in addition to palpation and age. A sensitivity close to 100% could be reached.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11304700     DOI: 10.1002/ijc.1235

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cancer        ISSN: 0020-7136            Impact factor:   7.396


  7 in total

1.  Mammographic interpretive volume and diagnostic mammogram interpretation performance in community practice.

Authors:  Sebastien Haneuse; Diana S M Buist; Diana L Miglioretti; Melissa L Anderson; Patricia A Carney; Tracy Onega; Berta M Geller; Karla Kerlikowske; Robert D Rosenberg; Bonnie C Yankaskas; Joann G Elmore; Stephen H Taplin; Robert A Smith; Edward A Sickles
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-11-21       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Clinical impact of the use of additional ultrasonography in diagnostic breast imaging.

Authors:  Luc D B Vercauteren; Alphons G H Kessels; Trudy van der Weijden; Dick Koster; Johan L Severens; Jos M A van Engelshoven; Karin Flobbe
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-04-23       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic imaging in symptomatic breast patients: team and individual performance.

Authors:  P Britton; J Warwick; M G Wallis; S O'Keeffe; K Taylor; R Sinnatamby; S Barter; M Gaskarth; S W Duffy; G C Wishart
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-01-11       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  Performance of diagnostic mammography differs in the United States and Denmark.

Authors:  Allan Jensen; Berta M Geller; Charlotte C Gard; Diana L Miglioretti; Bonnie Yankaskas; Patricia A Carney; Robert D Rosenberg; Ilse Vejborg; Elsebeth Lynge
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2010-10-15       Impact factor: 7.396

5.  The emergence of diagnostic imaging technologies in breast cancer: discovery, regulatory approval, reimbursement, and adoption in clinical guidelines.

Authors:  Laura S Gold; Gregory Klein; Lauren Carr; Larry Kessler; Sean D Sullivan
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2012-01-25       Impact factor: 3.909

6.  A Prospective Pilot Study on Use of Liquid Crystal Thermography to Detect Early Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Diana Hodorowicz-Zaniewska; Stefano Zurrida; Agnieszka Kotlarz; Piotr Kasprzak; Jan Skupień; Anna Ćwierz; Tadeusz J Popiela; Adrian Maciejewski; Paweł Basta
Journal:  Integr Cancer Ther       Date:  2020 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.279

7.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of breast cancer control interventions in Peru.

Authors:  Sten G Zelle; Tatiana Vidaurre; Julio E Abugattas; Javier E Manrique; Gustavo Sarria; José Jeronimo; Janice N Seinfeld; Jeremy A Lauer; Cecilia R Sepulveda; Diego Venegas; Rob Baltussen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-10       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.