Literature DB >> 9252206

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

L E Duijm1, G L Guit, J O Zaat, A R Koomen, D Willebrand.   

Abstract

In an observational follow-up study we determined whether the combined use of mammography and breast ultrasonography is an appropriate diagnostic tool to select patients with symptomatic breast disease who need additional pathological evaluation. Mammography and ultrasound were used as complementary diagnostic modalities in 3014 consecutively referred and mainly symptomatic patients. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and likelihood ratios were calculated according to standard procedures. Virtually complete follow-up was obtained by correlating the radiological diagnosis with clinical records, final pathological findings, records from the Cancer Register and data from questionnaires sent to the general practitioners of all the referred patients. After an average follow-up period of 30 months, the sensitivity for breast cancer detection was 92.0% and the specificity 97.7%. A positive predictive value of 68.0%, a negative predictive value of 99.6%, a positive likelihood ratio of 40 and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.08 were found. The mean diagnostic delay as a result of false negative examinations was 9 months (range 0-20 months). We conclude that breast imaging in routine daily practice, consisting of the integral use of mammography and ultrasonography, is an appropriate tool in the detection of cancer and should be included in the work-up of symptomatic breast disease.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9252206      PMCID: PMC2224070          DOI: 10.1038/bjc.1997.393

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Cancer        ISSN: 0007-0920            Impact factor:   7.640


  33 in total

1.  Five-year experience with single-view mammography randomized controlled screening in Sweden.

Authors:  L Tabár; E Akerlund; A Gad
Journal:  Recent Results Cancer Res       Date:  1984

2.  Palpable breast masses: evaluation by high frequency, hand-held real-time sonography and xeromammography. Work in progress.

Authors:  A C Fleischer; C A Muhletaler; V H Reynolds; J E Machin; G A Thieme; A L Bundy; A C Winfield; A E James
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  The use of state-of-the-art mammography in the detection of nonpalpable breast carcinoma.

Authors:  C Kaplan; R Matallana; M K Wallack
Journal:  Am Surg       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 0.688

4.  Mammography in symptomatic breast disease.

Authors:  A P Locker; A R Manhire; V Stickland; J Caseldine; R W Blamey
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1989-04-22       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Benign breast lesions: ultrasound detection and diagnosis.

Authors:  E A Sickles; R A Filly; P W Callen
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1984-05       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Automated water-path full-breast sonography: correlation with histology of 176 solid lesions.

Authors:  R L Egan; K L Egan
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1984-09       Impact factor: 3.959

7.  Mammography of symptomatic breasts. A report on 1119 consecutive patients.

Authors:  C G Standertskjöld-Nordenstam; U Svinhufvud
Journal:  Ann Chir Gynaecol       Date:  1980

8.  Mammographic follow-up of low-suspicion lesions: compliance rate and diagnostic yield.

Authors:  M A Helvie; D R Pennes; M Rebner; D D Adler
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Medical audit of a rapid-throughput mammography screening practice: methodology and results of 27,114 examinations.

Authors:  E A Sickles; S H Ominsky; R A Sollitto; H B Galvin; D L Monticciolo
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  What ultrasonography can tell in breast masses that mammography and physical examination cannot.

Authors:  D Rosner; D Blaird
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  1985-04       Impact factor: 3.454

View more
  8 in total

1.  The positive predictive value of the breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) as a method of quality assessment in breast imaging in a hospital population.

Authors:  Harmine M Zonderland; Thomas L Pope; Arend J Nieborg
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2004-07-09       Impact factor: 5.315

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.  Nonpalpable, probably benign breast lesions in general practice: the role of follow-up mammography.

Authors:  L E Duijm; J O Zaat; G L Guit
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 4.  Ultrasound Imaging Technologies for Breast Cancer Detection and Management: A Review.

Authors:  Rongrong Guo; Guolan Lu; Binjie Qin; Baowei Fei
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2017-10-26       Impact factor: 2.998

5.  Value of breast imaging in women with painful breasts: observational follow up study.

Authors:  L E Duijm; G L Guit; J H Hendriks; J O Zaat; W P Mali
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-11-28

6.  Analysis of mammographic diagnostic errors in breast clinic.

Authors:  V Palazzetti; F Guidi; L Ottaviani; G Valeri; S Baldassarre; G M Giuseppetti
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2016-07-02       Impact factor: 3.469

7.  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

8.  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

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.