Breast cancer screening using synthesized two-dimensional mammography: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the screening performance of synthesized mammography (SM) plus digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) with digital mammography (DM) plus DBT or DM alone.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched from January 2010 to January 2021. Eligible population-based studies on breast cancer screening comparing SM/DBT with DM/DBT or DM in asymptomatic women were included. A random-effect model was used in this meta-analysis. Data were summarized as risk differences (RDs), with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Thirteen studies involving 1,370,670 participants were included. Compared with DM/DBT, screening using SM/DBT had similar breast cancer detection rate (CDR) (RD = -0.1/1000 screens, 95 % CI = -0.4 to 0.2, p = 0.557, I = 0 %), but lower recall rate (RD = -0.56 %, 95 % CI = -1.03 to -0.08, p = 0.022, I = 90 %) and lower biopsy rate (RD = -0.33 %, 95 % CI = -0.56 to -0.10, p = 0.005, I = 78 %). Compared with DM, SM/DBT improved CDR (RD = 2.0/1000 screens, 95 % CI = 1.4 to 2.6, p < 0.001, I = 63 %) and reduced recall rate (RD = -0.95 %, 95 % CI = -1.91 to -0.002, p = 0.049, I = 99 %). However, SM/DBT and DM had similar interval cancer rate (ICR) (RD = 0.1/1000 screens, 95 % CI = -0.6 to 0.8, p = 0.836, I = 71 %) and biopsy rate (RD = -0.05 %, 95 % CI = -0.35 to 0.24, p = 0.727, I = 93 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Screening using SM/DBT has similar breast cancer detection but reduces recall and biopsy when compared with DM/DBT. SM/DBT improves CDR when compared with DM, but they have little difference in ICR. SM/DBT could replace DM/DBT in breast cancer screening to reduce radiation dose.