-
- Nehmat Houssami, Darren Lockie, Michelle Clemson, Vicki Pridmore, David Taylor, Georgina Marr, Jill Evans, and Petra Macaskill.
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW.
- Med. J. Aust. 2019 Oct 1; 211 (8): 357-362.
ObjectivesTo estimate detection measures for tomosynthesis and standard mammography; to assess the feasibility of using tomosynthesis in population-based screening for breast cancer.Design, SettingProspective pilot trial comparing tomosynthesis (with synthesised 2D images) and standard mammography screening of women attending Maroondah BreastScreen, a BreastScreen Victoria service in the eastern suburbs of Melbourne.ParticipantsWomen at least 40 years of age who presented for routine breast screening between 18 August 2017 and 8 November 2018.Main Outcome MeasuresCancer detection rate (CDR); proportion of screens that led to recall for further assessment.Results5018 tomosynthesis and 5166 standard mammography screens were undertaken in 10 146 women; 508 women (5.0% of screens) opted not to undergo tomosynthesis screening. With tomosynthesis, 49 cancers (40 invasive, 9 in situ) were detected (CDR, 9.8 [95% CI, 7.2-13] per 1000 screens); with standard mammography, 34 cancers (30 invasive, 4 in situ) were detected (CDR, 6.6 [95% CI, 4.6-9.2] per 1000 screens). The estimated difference in CDR was 3.2 more detections (95% CI, -0.32 to 6.8) per 1000 screens with tomosynthesis; the difference was greater for repeat screens and for women aged 60 years or more. The recall rate was greater for tomosynthesis (4.2%; 95% CI, 3.6-4.8%) than standard mammography (3.0%; 95% CI, 2.6-3.5%; estimated difference, 1.2%; 95% CI, 0.46-1.9%). The median screen reading time for tomosynthesis was 67 seconds (interquartile range [IQR] 46-105 seconds); for standard mammography, 16 seconds (IQR, 10-29 seconds).ConclusionsBreast cancer detection, recall for assessment, and screen reading time were each higher for tomosynthesis than for standard mammography. Our preliminary findings could form the basis of a large scale comparative evaluation of tomosynthesis and standard mammography for breast screening in Australia.Trial RegistrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12617000947303.© 2019 AMPCo Pty Ltd.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:

- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.