Interval cancer in the Córdoba Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial (CBTST): comparison of digital breast tomosynthesis plus digital mammography to digital mammography alone.

PURPOSE: This work aims to compare the interval cancer rate and interval cancer characteristics between women screened with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) + digital mammography (DM) and those screened with DM alone. METHODS: The interval cancer rate and interval cancer characteristics of the study population included in the Córdoba Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial (CBTST) were compared to a contemporary control population screened with DM. The tumour characteristics of screen-detected and interval cancers were also compared. Contingency tables were used to compare interval cancer rates. The chi-square test and Fisher's exact test were used to compare the qualitative characteristics of the cancers whereas Student's t test and the Mann-Whitney U test were used to analyse quantitative features. RESULTS: A total of 16,068 screening exams with DBT + DM were conducted within the CBTST (mean age 57.59 ± 5.9 [SD]) between January 2015 and December 2016 (study population). In parallel, 23,787 women (mean age 58.89 ± 5.9 standard deviation [SD]) were screened with DM (control population). The interval cancer rate was lower in the study population than in the control population (15 [0.93‰; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.73, 1.14] vs 43 [1.8‰; 95% CI: 1.58, 2.04] respectively; p = 0.045). The difference in rate was more marked in women with dense breasts (0.95‰ in the study population vs 3.17‰ in the control population; p = 0.031). Interval cancers were smaller in the study population than in the control population (p = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS: The interval cancer rate was lower in women screened with DBT + DM compared to those screened with DM alone. These differences were more pronounced in women with dense breasts. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Women screened using tomosynthesis and digital mammography had a lower rate of interval cancer than women screened with digital mammography, with the greatest difference in the interval cancer rate observed in women with dense breasts. KEY POINTS: • The interval cancer rate was lower in the study population (digital breast tomosynthesis [DBT] + digital mammography [DM]) than in the control population (DM). • The difference in interval cancer rates was more pronounced in women with dense breasts. • Interval cancers were smaller in the study population (DBT + DM) than in the control population (DM).

Prospective study aiming to compare 2D mammography and tomosynthesis + synthesized mammography in terms of cancer detection and recall. From double reading of 2D mammography to single reading of tomosynthesis.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate tomosynthesis compared with 2D-mammography in cancer detection and recalls in a screening-programme, and assess performing synthesized instead of 2D, and compare double reading of 2D with single reading of tomosynthesis. METHODS: Women (age 50-69 years) participating in the screening-programme were included. 2D-mammography and tomosynthesis were performed. There were four reading models: 2D-mammography (first); 2D-mammography (second); tomosynthesis + synthesized (third); tomosynthesis + synthesized + 2D (fourth reading). Paired double reading of 2D (first+second) and tomosynthesis (third+fourth) were analysed. RESULTS: In 16,067 participants, there were 98 cancers and 1,196 recalls. Comparing double reading of 2D with single reading of tomosynthesis, there was an increase of 12.6 % in cancer detection with the third reading (p= 0.043) and 6.9 % with the fourth reading (p=0.210), and a decrease in recalls of 40.5 % (p<0.001) and 44.4 % (p<0.001), respectively. With double reading of both techniques, there was an increase in cancer detection of 17.4 % (p = 0.004) and a decrease in recalls of 12.5 % (p = 0.001) with tomosynthesis. CONCLUSION: Single reading of tomosynthesis plus synthesized increased cancer detection and decreased recalls compared with double reading 2D. 2D did not improve results when added to tomosynthesis. KEY POINTS: • Tomosynthesis increases cancer detection and decreases recall rates versus 2D mammography. • Synthesized-mammography avoids performing 2D, showing higher cancer detection. • Single reading of tomosynthesis + synthesized is feasible as a new practice.