A randomised trial of screening with digital breast tomosynthesis plus conventional digital 2D mammography versus 2D mammography alone in younger higher risk women.

INTRODUCTION: Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has been shown to increase invasive cancer detection rates at screening compared to full field digital (2D) mammography alone, and some studies have reported a reduction in the screening recall rate. No prospective randomised studies of DBT have previously been published. This study compares recall rates with 2D mammography with and without concurrent DBT in women in their forties with a family history of breast cancer undergoing incident screening. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Asymptomatic women aged 40-49 who had previously undergone mammography for an increased risk of breast cancer were recruited in two screening centres. Participants were randomised to screening with 2D mammography only at the first study screen followed a year later by screening with 2D plus DBT, or vice versa. Recall rates were compared using an intention to treat analysis. Reading performance was analysed for the larger centre. RESULTS: 1227 women were recruited. 1221 first screens (604 2D, 617 2D+DBT) and 1124second screens (558 2D+DBT, 566 2D) were analysed. Eleven women had screen-detected cancers: 5 after 2D, 6 after 2D+DBT. The false positive recall rates were 2.4% for 2D and 2.2% for 2D+DBT (p=0.89). There was a significantly greater reduction between rounds in the number of women with abnormal reads who were not recalled after consensus/arbitration with 2D+DBT than 2D (p=0.023). CONCLUSION: The addition of DBT to 2D mammography in incident screening did not lead to a significant reduction in recall rate. DBT may increase reader uncertainty until DBT screening experience is acquired.

Preliminary validation of a new variable pattern for daily quality assurance of medical image display devices.

This paper reports on a comparative study between the well-established test patterns for daily quality assurance (QA) of monitors of the American Association of Medical Physicists, Task Group 18 (AAPMtg18) and the Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V (DIN), and a newly proposed variable test pattern. A characteristic of the test patterns currently used for the QA of monitors is their static nature: The same test pattern is always used. This enables a learning effect that may bias the results over time. To address this problem we have developed a variable pattern for the quality assurance of monitors (MoniQA) that allows an evaluation of contrast visibility, geometric distortion, resolution, global image quality including uniformity, and artifacts. The test pattern includes randomly generated elements intended to prevent the observer from learning the test. Examples are random characters that have to be discriminated from the background to evaluate the threshold luminance difference and variable positions of different features in the test pattern. The newly proposed test patterns were generated and visualized on different viewing stations with a software tool developed in JAVA. In this study, we validated these patterns against the well-known AAPMtg18 and DIN test patterns on 22 monitors. The results showed that the MoniQA test can indicate the same monitor problems as the other well-known patterns and is significantly quicker to evaluate than the AAPMtg18 test patterns. The MoniQA pattern is a promising alternative for daily quality control of medical viewing stations.