Literature DB >> 32096704

Supplemental Breast US Screening in Women with a Personal History of Breast Cancer: A Matched Cohort Study.

Soo-Yeon Kim1, Nariya Cho1, Soo Yeon Kim1, Yunhee Choi1, Eun Sil Kim1, Su Min Ha1, Su Hyun Lee1, Jung Min Chang1, Woo Kyung Moon1.   

Abstract

Background There is limited research on supplemental screening breast US in women with a personal history of breast cancer (PHBC). Purpose To compare the performance of supplemental screening breast US in women with and women without a PHBC by using a matched cohort. Materials and Methods Consecutive asymptomatic women who underwent radiologist-performed supplemental breast US and mammography between January 2013 and December 2013 at a tertiary referral university hospital were retrospectively identified. Inclusion criteria were negative or benign findings at mammography, follow-up data for at least 1 year, first cancer stage of 0 to II in women with a PHBC, and incidence screening in women without a PHBC. The two groups were matched 1:1 according to age and breast density. Performance measures were compared with McNemar test, generalized estimating equation, or penalized likelihood logistic regression. Results A total of 3226 women with a PHBC were matched with 3226 women without a PHBC (mean age ± standard deviation, 52 years ± 9; mammographic breast density, fatty in 603 and dense in 2623). Fourteen cancers (six screen-detected, eight interval cancers) were found in women with a PHBC and 13 cancers (12 screen-detected, one interval cancer) in women without a PHBC. Supplemental US in women with a PHBC compared with women without a PHBC showed lower sensitivity (43% [95% confidence interval {CI}: 18%, 71%; six of 14 cancers] vs 92% [95% CI: 64%, 100%; 12 of 13 cancers]; P = .03), higher interval cancer rates (2.5 [95% CI: 1.1, 4.9; eight of 3226 women] vs 0.3 [95% CI: 0, 1.7; one of 3226 women] per 1000; P = .02), and higher specificity (92.8% [95% CI: 91.9%, 93.7%; 2982 of 3212 women] vs 89.3% [95% CI: 88.2%, 90.4%; 2870 of 3213 women]; P < .001), respectively. Conclusion Supplemental US screening in women with a personal history of breast cancer had lower sensitivity and higher interval cancer rate but higher specificity relative to women without a personal history of breast cancer. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Lee and Lee in this issue.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 32096704     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2020191691

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


  3 in total

1.  Identifying Effective Supplemental Screening Strategies for Women with a Personal History of Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Christoph I Lee; Janie M Lee
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2020-02-25       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Digital Mammography and Breast Tomosynthesis Performance in Women with a Personal History of Breast Cancer, 2007-2016.

Authors:  Janie M Lee; Laura E Ichikawa; Karen J Wernli; Erin Bowles; Jennifer M Specht; Karla Kerlikowske; Diana L Miglioretti; Kathryn P Lowry; Anna N A Tosteson; Natasha K Stout; Nehmat Houssami; Tracy Onega; Diana S M Buist
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2021-05-18       Impact factor: 29.146

3.  The Usefulness of Ultrasound Surveillance for Axillary Recurrence in Women With Personal History of Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Sung Ui Shin; Jung Min Chang; Jiwon Park; Han-Byoel Lee; Wonshik Han; Woo Kyung Moon
Journal:  J Breast Cancer       Date:  2021-12-03       Impact factor: 3.588

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.