Breast cancer screening with tomosynthesis (3D mammography) with acquired or synthetic 2D mammography compared with 2D mammography alone (STORM-2): a population-based prospective study.
Field | Value | Language |
dc.contributor.author | Bernardi, Daniela | |
dc.contributor.author | Macaskill, Petra | |
dc.contributor.author | Pellegrini, Marco | |
dc.contributor.author | Valentini, Marvi | |
dc.contributor.author | Fanto, Carmine | |
dc.contributor.author | Ostillio, Livio | |
dc.contributor.author | Tuttobene, Paolina | |
dc.contributor.author | Luparia, Andrea | |
dc.contributor.author | Houssami, Nehmat | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-12-19T08:16:39Z | |
dc.date.available | 2021-12-19T08:16:39Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2016 | en_AU |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2123/27231 | |
dc.description.abstract | Breast tomosynthesis (pseudo-3D mammography) improves breast cancer detection when added to 2D mammography. In this study, we examined whether integrating 3D mammography with either standard 2D mammography acquisitions or with synthetic 2D images (reconstructed from 3D mammography) would detect more cases of breast cancer than 2D mammography alone, to potentially reduce the radiation burden from the combination of 2D plus 3D acquisitions. The Screening with Tomosynthesis Or standard Mammography-2 (STORM-2) study was a prospective population-based screening study comparing integrated 3D mammography (dual-acquisition 2D–3D mammography or 2D synthetic–3D mammography) with 2D mammography alone. Asymptomatic women aged 49 years or older who attended population-based screening in Trento, Italy were recruited for the study. All participants underwent digital mammography with 2D and 3D mammography acquisitions, with the use of software that allowed synthetic 2D mammographic images to be reconstructed from 3D acquisitions. Mammography screen-reading was done in two parallel double-readings conducted sequentially for 2D acquisitions followed by integrated acquisitions. Recall based on a positive mammography result was defined as recall at any screen read. Primary outcome measures were a comparison between integrated (2D–3D or 2D synthetic–3D) mammography and 2D mammography alone of the number of cases of screen-detected breast cancer, the cancer detection rate per 1000 screens, the incremental cancer detection rate, and the number and percentage of false-positive recalls. | en_AU |
dc.language.iso | en | en_AU |
dc.publisher | Elsevier | en_AU |
dc.relation.ispartof | The Lancet Oncology | en_AU |
dc.rights | Copyright All Rights Reserved | en_AU |
dc.subject | Tumour Imaging | en_AU |
dc.subject | Breast cancer | en_AU |
dc.subject | Cancer Epidemiology | en_AU |
dc.title | Breast cancer screening with tomosynthesis (3D mammography) with acquired or synthetic 2D mammography compared with 2D mammography alone (STORM-2): a population-based prospective study. | en_AU |
dc.type | Article | en_AU |
dc.subject.asrc | 1112 Oncology and Carcinogenesis | en_AU |
dc.subject.asrc | 1117 Public Health and Health Services | en_AU |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30101-2 | |
dc.type.pubtype | Publisher's version | en_AU |
usyd.faculty | SeS faculties schools::Faculty of Medicine and Health::Sydney School of Public Health | en_AU |
usyd.citation.volume | 17 | en_AU |
usyd.citation.issue | 8 | en_AU |
usyd.citation.spage | 1105 | en_AU |
usyd.citation.epage | 1113 | en_AU |
workflow.metadata.only | Yes | en_AU |
Associated file/s
There are no files associated with this item.
Associated collections