Fenton Joshua J, Rolnick Sharon J, Harris Emily L, Barton Mary B, Barlow William E, Reisch Lisa M, Herrinton Lisa J, Geiger Ann M, Fletcher Suzanne W, Elmore Joann G
Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA 95817, USA.
J Gen Intern Med. 2007 Mar;22(3):332-7. doi: 10.1007/s11606-006-0062-7.
Millions of women receive clinical breast examination (CBE) each year, as either a breast cancer screening test or a diagnostic test for breast symptoms. While screening CBE had moderately high specificity (approximately 94%) in clinical trials, community clinicians may be comparatively inexperienced and may conduct relatively brief examinations, resulting in even higher specificity but lower sensitivity.
To estimate the specificity of screening and diagnostic CBE in clinical practice and identify patient factors associated with specificity.
Retrospective cohort study.
Breast-cancer-free female health plan enrollees in 5 states (WA, OR, CA, MA, and MN) who received CBE (N = 1,484).
Medical charts were abstracted to ascertain breast cancer risk factors, examination purpose (screening vs diagnostic), and results (true-negative vs false-positive). Women were considered "average-risk" if they had neither a family history of breast cancer nor a prior breast biopsy and "increased-risk" otherwise.
Among average- and increased-risk women, respectively, the specificity (true-negative proportion) of screening CBE was 99.4% [95% confidence interval (CI): 98.8-99.7%] and 97.1% (95% CI: 95.7-98.0%), and the specificity of diagnostic CBE was 68.7% (95% CI: 59.7-76.5%) and 57.1% (95% CI: 51.1-63.0%). The odds of a true-negative screening CBE (specificity) were significantly lower among women at increased risk of breast cancer (adjusted odds ratio 0.21; 95% CI: 0.10-0.46).
Screening CBE likely has higher specificity among community clinicians compared to examiners in clinical trials of breast cancer screening, even among women at increased breast cancer risk. Highly specific examinations, however, may have relatively low sensitivity for breast cancer. Diagnostic CBE, meanwhile, is relatively nonspecific.
每年有数百万女性接受临床乳腺检查(CBE),作为乳腺癌筛查测试或针对乳腺症状的诊断测试。虽然在临床试验中筛查性CBE具有中等偏高的特异性(约94%),但社区临床医生可能相对缺乏经验,且检查可能相对简短,导致特异性更高但敏感性更低。
评估临床实践中筛查性和诊断性CBE的特异性,并确定与特异性相关的患者因素。
回顾性队列研究。
来自5个州(华盛顿州、俄勒冈州、加利福尼亚州、马萨诸塞州和明尼苏达州)的无乳腺癌女性健康计划参保者,她们接受了CBE(N = 1484)。
提取医疗记录以确定乳腺癌风险因素、检查目的(筛查与诊断)以及结果(真阴性与假阳性)。如果女性既无乳腺癌家族史也未进行过乳腺活检,则被视为“平均风险”,否则为“高风险”。
在平均风险和高风险女性中,筛查性CBE的特异性(真阴性比例)分别为99.4% [95%置信区间(CI):98.8 - 99.7%]和97.1%(95% CI:95.7 - 98.0%),诊断性CBE的特异性分别为68.7%(95% CI:59.7 - 76.5%)和57.1%(95% CI:51.1 - 63.0%)。乳腺癌高风险女性中筛查性CBE真阴性(特异性)的几率显著更低(调整后的优势比为0.21;95% CI:0.10 - 0.46)。
与乳腺癌筛查临床试验中的检查者相比而言,社区临床医生进行的筛查性CBE可能具有更高的特异性,即使是在乳腺癌高风险女性中。然而,高特异性检查对乳腺癌的敏感性可能相对较低。与此同时,诊断性CBE相对缺乏特异性。