Literature DB >> 26110667

MR Imaging as an Additional Screening Modality for the Detection of Breast Cancer in Women Aged 50-75 Years with Extremely Dense Breasts: The DENSE Trial Study Design.

Marleen J Emaus1, Marije F Bakker1, Petra H M Peeters1, Claudette E Loo1, Ritse M Mann1, Mathijn D F de Jong1, Robertus H C Bisschops1, Jeroen Veltman1, Katya M Duvivier1, Marc B I Lobbes1, Ruud M Pijnappel1, Nico Karssemeijer1, Harry J de Koning1, Maurice A A J van den Bosch1, Evelyn M Monninkhof1, Willem P Th M Mali1, Wouter B Veldhuis1, Carla H van Gils1.   

Abstract

Women with extremely dense breasts have an increased risk of breast cancer and lower mammographic tumor detectability. Nevertheless, in most countries, these women are currently screened with mammography only. Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging has the potential to improve breast cancer detection at an early stage because of its higher sensitivity. However, MR imaging is more expensive and is expected to be accompanied by an increase in the number of false-positive results and, possibly, an increase in overdiagnosis. To study the additional value of MR imaging, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) design is needed in which one group undergoes mammography and the other group undergoes mammography and MR imaging. With this design, it is possible to determine the proportion of interval cancers within each study arm. For this to be an effective screening strategy, the additional cancers detected at MR imaging screening must be accompanied by a subsequent reduction in interval cancers. The Dense Tissue and Early Breast Neoplasm Screening, or DENSE, trial is a multicenter RCT performed in the Dutch biennial population-based screening program (subject age range, 50-75 years). The study was approved by the Dutch Minister of Health, Welfare and Sport. In this study, mammographic density is measured by using a fully automated volumetric method. Participants with extremely dense breasts (American College of Radiology breast density category 4) and a negative result at mammography (Breast Imaging Recording and Data System category 1 or 2) are randomly assigned to undergo additional MR imaging (n = 7237) or to be treated according to current practice (n = 28 948). Participants provide written informed consent before the MR imaging examination, which consists of dynamic breast MR imaging with gadolinium-based contrast medium and is intended to be performed for three consecutive screening rounds. The primary outcome is the difference in the proportions of interval cancers between the study arms. Secondary outcomes are the number of MR imaging screening-detected cancers, proportions of false-positive results, diagnostic yield of MR imaging, tumor characteristics, quality of life, and cost effectiveness. © RSNA, 2015

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26110667     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2015141827

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  22 in total

1.  Supplemental Breast Cancer Screening: A Density Conundrum.

Authors:  Jeffrey A Tice; Karla Kerlikowske
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 2.  [Screening for cervical and breast cancer].

Authors:  J Wilm; S Schüler-Toprak; O Ortmann
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 1.011

3.  Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography vs. mammography and MRI - clinical performance in a multi-reader evaluation.

Authors:  Eva M Fallenberg; Florian F Schmitzberger; Heba Amer; Barbara Ingold-Heppner; Corinne Balleyguier; Felix Diekmann; Florian Engelken; Ritse M Mann; Diane M Renz; Ulrich Bick; Bernd Hamm; Clarisse Dromain
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-11-28       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Breast-density assessment with hand-held ultrasound: A novel biomarker to assess breast cancer risk and to tailor screening?

Authors:  Sergio J Sanabria; Orcun Goksel; Katharina Martini; Serafino Forte; Thomas Frauenfelder; Rahel A Kubik-Huch; Marga B Rominger
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 5.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging as an Adjunct to Mammography for Breast Cancer Screening in Women at Less Than High Risk for Breast Cancer: A Health Technology Assessment.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2016-11-01

Review 6.  Risk-based Breast Cancer Screening: Implications of Breast Density.

Authors:  Christoph I Lee; Linda E Chen; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  Med Clin North Am       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 5.456

Review 7.  Screening MRI in Women at Intermediate Breast Cancer Risk: An Update of the Recent Literature.

Authors:  Manisha Bahl
Journal:  J Breast Imaging       Date:  2022-05-08

8.  Standardised lesion segmentation for imaging biomarker quantitation: a consensus recommendation from ESR and EORTC.

Authors:  Nandita M deSouza; Aad van der Lugt; Christophe M Deroose; Angel Alberich-Bayarri; Luc Bidaut; Laure Fournier; Lena Costaridou; Daniela E Oprea-Lager; Elmar Kotter; Marion Smits; Marius E Mayerhoefer; Ronald Boellaard; Anna Caroli; Lioe-Fee de Geus-Oei; Wolfgang G Kunz; Edwin H Oei; Frederic Lecouvet; Manuela Franca; Christian Loewe; Egesta Lopci; Caroline Caramella; Anders Persson; Xavier Golay; Marc Dewey; James P B O'Connor; Pim deGraaf; Sergios Gatidis; Gudrun Zahlmann
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2022-10-04

9.  Potential of Noncontrast Magnetic Resonance Imaging With Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in Characterization of Breast Lesions: Intraindividual Comparison With Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Authors:  Pascal A T Baltzer; Hubert Bickel; Claudio Spick; Georg Wengert; Ramona Woitek; Panagiotis Kapetas; Paola Clauser; Thomas H Helbich; Katja Pinker
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 6.016

10.  Detection of noncalcified breast cancer in patients with extremely dense breasts using digital breast tomosynthesis compared with full-field digital mammography.

Authors:  Ann Yi; Jung Min Chang; Sung Ui Shin; A Jung Chu; Nariya Cho; Dong-Young Noh; Woo Kyung Moon
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-10-03       Impact factor: 3.039

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.