Literature DB >> 20104518

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

Allan Jensen1, Berta M Geller, Charlotte C Gard, Diana L Miglioretti, Bonnie Yankaskas, Patricia A Carney, Robert D Rosenberg, Ilse Vejborg, Elsebeth Lynge.   

Abstract

Diagnostic mammography is the primary imaging modality to diagnose breast cancer. However, few studies have evaluated variability in diagnostic mammography performance in communities, and none has done so between countries. We compared diagnostic mammography performance in community-based settings in the United States and Denmark. The performance of 93,585 diagnostic mammograms from 180 facilities contributing data to the US Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) from 1999 to 2001 was compared to that of all 51,313 diagnostic mammograms performed at Danish clinics in 2000. We used the imaging workup's final assessment to determine sensitivity, specificity and an estimate of accuracy: area under the receiver-operating characteristics (ROCs) curve (AUC). Diagnostic mammography had slightly higher sensitivity in the United States (85%) than in Denmark (82%). In contrast, it had higher specificity in Denmark (99%) than in the United States (93%). The AUC was high in both countries: 0.91 in United States and 0.95 in Denmark. Denmark's higher accuracy may result from supplementary ultrasound examinations, which are provided to 74% of Danish women but only 37% to 52% of US women. In addition, Danish mammography facilities specialize in either diagnosis or screening, possibly leading to greater diagnostic mammography expertise in facilities dedicated to symptomatic patients. Performance of community-based diagnostic mammography settings varied markedly between the 2 countries, indicating that it can be further optimized.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20104518      PMCID: PMC3755747          DOI: 10.1002/ijc.25198

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


  22 in total

1.  Do nonattenders in mammography screening programmes seek mammography elsewhere?

Authors:  Allan Jensen; Anne Helene Olsen; My von Euler-Chelpin; Sisse Helle Njor; Ilse Vejborg; Elsebeth Lynge
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2005-01-20       Impact factor: 7.396

2.  Quasi-continuous and discrete confidence rating scales for observer performance studies: Effects on ROC analysis.

Authors:  Lubomir Hadjiiski; Heang-Ping Chan; Berkman Sahiner; Mark A Helvie; Marilyn A Roubidoux
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 3.173

3.  Receiver operating characteristic analysis: a proper measurement for performance in breast cancer screening?

Authors:  Per Skaane; Loren Niklason
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  Performance of combined clinical mammography and needle biopsy: a nationwide study from Denmark.

Authors:  Allan Jensen; Fritz Rank; Uffe Dyreborg; Niels Severinsen; Susanne Nielsen; Elsebeth Lynge; Ilse Vejborg
Journal:  APMIS       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.205

5.  Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium: a national mammography screening and outcomes database.

Authors:  R Ballard-Barbash; S H Taplin; B C Yankaskas; V L Ernster; R D Rosenberg; P A Carney; W E Barlow; B M Geller; K Kerlikowske; B K Edwards; C F Lynch; N Urban; C A Chrvala; C R Key; S P Poplack; J K Worden; L G Kessler
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Improving the concordance of mammography assessment and management recommendations.

Authors:  Berta M Geller; Laura E Ichikawa; Diana S M Buist; Edward A Sickles; Patricia A Carney; Bonnie C Yankaskas; Mark Dignan; Karla Kerlikowske; K Robin Yabroff; William Barlow; Robert D Rosenberg
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Performance of clinical mammography: a nationwide study from Denmark.

Authors:  Allan Jensen; Ilse Vejborg; Niels Severinsen; Susanne Nielsen; Fritz Rank; Gerd Just Mikkelsen; Jørgen Hilden; Dorte Vistisen; Uffe Dyreborg; Elsebeth Lynge
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2006-07-01       Impact factor: 7.396

8.  Performance benchmarks for diagnostic mammography.

Authors:  Edward A Sickles; Diana L Miglioretti; Rachel Ballard-Barbash; Berta M Geller; Jessica W T Leung; Robert D Rosenberg; Rebecca Smith-Bindman; Bonnie C Yankaskas
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Radiologist characteristics associated with interpretive performance of diagnostic mammography.

Authors:  Diana L Miglioretti; Rebecca Smith-Bindman; Linn Abraham; R James Brenner; Patricia A Carney; Erin J Aiello Bowles; Diana S M Buist; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2007-12-11       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of breast imaging in the detection of cancer.

Authors:  L E Duijm; G L Guit; J O Zaat; A R Koomen; D Willebrand
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  3 in total

1.  National Performance Benchmarks for Modern Diagnostic Digital Mammography: Update from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.

Authors:  Brian L Sprague; Robert F Arao; Diana L Miglioretti; Louise M Henderson; Diana S M Buist; Tracy Onega; Garth H Rauscher; Janie M Lee; Anna N A Tosteson; Karla Kerlikowske; Constance D Lehman
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2017-02-28       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Patient and Radiologist Characteristics Associated With Accuracy of Two Types of Diagnostic Mammograms.

Authors:  Sara L Jackson; Linn Abraham; Diana L Miglioretti; Diana S M Buist; Karla Kerlikowske; Tracy Onega; Patricia A Carney; Edward A Sickles; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 3.  Mammographic compression practices of force- and pressure-standardisation protocol: A scoping review.

Authors:  Elizabeth Serwan; Donna Matthews; Josephine Davies; Minh Chau
Journal:  J Med Radiat Sci       Date:  2020-05-18
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.