Differential detection by breast density for digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography population screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis
| Field | Value | Language |
| dc.contributor.author | Li, Tong | |
| dc.contributor.author | Houssami, Nehmat | |
| dc.contributor.author | Noguchi, Naomi | |
| dc.contributor.author | Zeng, Aileen | |
| dc.contributor.author | Marinovich, M Luke | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2023-03-20T00:25:26Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2023-03-20T00:25:26Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2022 | en |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2123/30239 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Background We examined whether digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) detects differentially in high- or low-density screens. Methods We searched six databases (2009–2020) for studies comparing DBT and digital mammography (DM), and reporting cancer detection rate (CDR) and/or recall rate by breast density. Meta-analysis was performed to pool incremental CDR and recall rate for DBT (versus DM) for high- and low-density (dichotomised based on BI-RADS) and within-study differences in incremental estimates between high- and low-density. Screening settings (European/US) were compared. Results Pooled within-study difference in incremental CDR for high- versus low-density was 1.0/1000 screens (95% CI: 0.3, 1.6; p = 0.003). Estimates were not significantly different in US (0.6/1000; 95% CI: 0.0, 1.3; p = 0.05) and European (1.9/1000; 95% CI: 0.3, 3.5; p = 0.02) settings (p for subgroup difference = 0.15). For incremental recall rate, within-study differences between density subgroups differed by setting (p < 0.001). Pooled incremental recall was less in high- versus low-density screens (−0.9%; 95% CI: −1.4%, −0.4%; p < 0.001) in US screening, and greater (0.8%; 95% CI: 0.3%, 1.3%; p = 0.001) in European screening. Conclusions DBT has differential incremental cancer detection and recall by breast density. Although incremental CDR is greater in high-density, a substantial proportion of additional cancers is likely to be detected in low-density screens. Our findings may assist screening programmes considering DBT for density-tailored screening. | en |
| dc.language.iso | en | en |
| dc.publisher | Springer | en |
| dc.relation.ispartof | British Journal of Cancer | en |
| dc.rights | Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 | en |
| dc.subject | digital breast tomosynthesis | en |
| dc.subject | breast cancer | en |
| dc.subject | screening | en |
| dc.subject | mammography | en |
| dc.title | Differential detection by breast density for digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography population screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis | en |
| dc.type | Article | en |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1038/s41416-022-01790-x | |
| dc.type.pubtype | Publisher's version | en |
| usyd.faculty | SeS faculties schools::Faculty of Medicine and Health::Sydney School of Public Health | en |
| usyd.citation.volume | 127 | en |
| usyd.citation.spage | 116 | en |
| usyd.citation.epage | 125 | en |
| workflow.metadata.only | Yes | en |
Associated file/s
There are no files associated with this item.
Associated collections