• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

在筛查人群中召回界限清楚的肿块的困境:文献综述叙述和对荷兰筛查实践的探索。

The dilemma of recalling well-circumscribed masses in a screening population: A narrative literature review and exploration of Dutch screening practice.

机构信息

Dutch Expert Centre for Screening (LRCB), Wijchenseweg 101, 6538 SW, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

Dutch Expert Centre for Screening (LRCB), Wijchenseweg 101, 6538 SW, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

出版信息

Breast. 2023 Jun;69:431-440. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2023.05.001. Epub 2023 May 3.

DOI:10.1016/j.breast.2023.05.001
PMID:37169601
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10300612/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

In Dutch breast cancer screening, solitary, new or growing well-circumscribed masses should be recalled for further assessment. This results in cancers detected but also in false positive recalls, especially at initial screening. The aim of this study was to determine characteristics of well-circumscribed masses at mammography and identify potential methods to improve the recall strategy.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed. In addition, follow-up data were retrieved on all 8860 recalled women in a Dutch screening region from 2014 to 2019.

RESULTS

Based on 15 articles identified in the literature search, we found that probably benign well-circumscribed masses that were kept under surveillance had a positive predictive value (PPV) of 0-2%. New or enlarging solitary well-circumscribed masses had a PPV of 10-12%. In general the detected carcinomas had a favorable prognosis. In our exploration of screening practice, 25% of recalls (2133/8860) were triggered by a well-circumscribed mass. Those recalls had a PPV of 2.0% for initial and 10.6% for subsequent screening. Most detected carcinomas had a favorable prognosis as well.

CONCLUSION

To recognize malignancies presenting as well-circumscribed masses, identifying solitary, new or growing lesions is key. This information is missing at initial screening since prior examinations are not available, leading to a low PPV. Access to prior clinical examinations may therefore improve this PPV. In addition, given the generally favorable prognosis of screen-detected malignant well-circumscribed masses, one may opt to recall these lesions at subsequent screening, if grown, rather than at initial screening.

摘要

背景

在荷兰乳腺癌筛查中,应召回新出现或持续生长的孤立性、边界清晰的肿块进行进一步评估。这会导致癌症的检出,也会导致假阳性召回,尤其是在初始筛查时。本研究旨在确定乳腺 X 线摄影中边界清晰肿块的特征,并确定可能改进召回策略的方法。

方法

使用 PubMed 进行了系统的文献检索。此外,还检索了 2014 年至 2019 年荷兰某筛查地区所有 8860 名召回女性的随访数据。

结果

根据文献检索中确定的 15 篇文章,我们发现处于监测状态的可能良性边界清晰的肿块保持不变,其阳性预测值(PPV)为 0-2%。新出现或增大的孤立性边界清晰肿块的 PPV 为 10-12%。一般来说,检出的癌具有良好的预后。在我们对筛查实践的探索中,25%的召回(2133/8860)是由边界清晰的肿块引起的。这些召回在初始筛查时的 PPV 为 2.0%,在后续筛查时的 PPV 为 10.6%。大多数检出的癌也具有良好的预后。

结论

为了识别以边界清晰的肿块为表现的恶性肿瘤,识别孤立性、新出现或生长的病变是关键。由于无法获得之前的检查,初始筛查时缺少这些信息,导致 PPV 较低。因此,获得之前的临床检查可能会提高这个 PPV。此外,鉴于边界清晰的肿块在筛查中检测到的恶性肿瘤通常具有良好的预后,因此如果这些病变在后续筛查中生长,而不是在初始筛查中,就可以选择召回这些病变。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7253/10300612/371be62c8269/fx1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7253/10300612/96b0f5418d16/gr1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7253/10300612/63b7a39ef656/gr2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7253/10300612/371be62c8269/fx1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7253/10300612/96b0f5418d16/gr1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7253/10300612/63b7a39ef656/gr2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7253/10300612/371be62c8269/fx1.jpg

相似文献

1
The dilemma of recalling well-circumscribed masses in a screening population: A narrative literature review and exploration of Dutch screening practice.在筛查人群中召回界限清楚的肿块的困境:文献综述叙述和对荷兰筛查实践的探索。
Breast. 2023 Jun;69:431-440. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2023.05.001. Epub 2023 May 3.
2
Multiple Bilateral Circumscribed Masses at Screening Breast Ultrasound: Outcomes of New or Enlarging Masses at Follow-Up.筛查性乳腺超声检查发现多个双侧局限性肿块:随访中新发或增大肿块的结局。
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2022 Mar;218(3):435-443. doi: 10.2214/AJR.21.26520. Epub 2021 Sep 22.
3
Multiple bilateral circumscribed masses at screening breast US: consider annual follow-up.筛查性乳腺超声检查发现多个双侧局限性肿块:考虑每年随访。
Radiology. 2013 Sep;268(3):673-83. doi: 10.1148/radiol.13122251. Epub 2013 Apr 24.
4
Using deep learning to assist readers during the arbitration process: a lesion-based retrospective evaluation of breast cancer screening performance.使用深度学习辅助读片者进行仲裁:基于病变的乳腺癌筛查性能回顾性评估。
Eur Radiol. 2022 Feb;32(2):842-852. doi: 10.1007/s00330-021-08217-w. Epub 2021 Aug 12.
5
Re-attendance at biennial screening mammography following a repeated false positive recall.在多次假阳性召回后再次参加两年一次的乳腺筛查钼靶检查。
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014 Jun;145(2):429-37. doi: 10.1007/s10549-014-2959-x. Epub 2014 Apr 19.
6
Screening outcome in women repeatedly recalled for the same mammographic abnormality before, during and after the transition from screen-film to full-field digital screening mammography.在从屏-片乳腺摄影向全视野数字化乳腺筛查摄影转变之前、期间和之后,因相同乳腺摄影异常而被反复召回的女性的筛查结果。
Eur Radiol. 2017 Feb;27(2):553-561. doi: 10.1007/s00330-016-4399-y. Epub 2016 May 14.
7
Short-term recall for 'probably benign' mammographic lesions detected in a three yearly screening programme.在一项三年一次的筛查计划中检测到的“可能为良性”乳腺钼靶病变的短期召回情况。
Clin Radiol. 1994 Jun;49(6):391-5. doi: 10.1016/s0009-9260(05)81823-9.
8
Frequency and characteristics of contralateral breast abnormalities following recall at screening mammography.筛查性乳房 X 光摄影检查后召回时对侧乳腺异常的频率和特征。
Eur Radiol. 2018 Oct;28(10):4205-4214. doi: 10.1007/s00330-018-5370-x. Epub 2018 Apr 17.
9
Comparison of visibility of circumscribed masses on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) and 2D mammography: are circumscribed masses better visualized and assured of being benign on DBT?数字乳腺断层合成(DBT)与二维乳腺X线摄影对局限性肿块可视性的比较:局限性肿块在DBT上是否能更好地显示并确定为良性?
Eur Radiol. 2017 Feb;27(2):570-577. doi: 10.1007/s00330-016-4420-5. Epub 2016 May 28.
10
Minority report - false negative breast assessment in women recalled for suspicious screening mammography: imaging and pathological features, and associated delay in diagnosis.少数病例报告——因乳腺钼靶筛查可疑而被召回的女性中乳腺评估假阴性:影像学和病理特征以及相关诊断延迟
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2007 Sep;105(1):37-43. doi: 10.1007/s10549-006-9425-3. Epub 2006 Nov 18.

本文引用的文献

1
Worldwide Review and Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies Measuring the Effect of Mammography Screening Programmes on Incidence-Based Breast Cancer Mortality.测量乳腺钼靶筛查计划对基于发病率的乳腺癌死亡率影响的队列研究的全球综述与荟萃分析
Cancers (Basel). 2020 Apr 15;12(4):976. doi: 10.3390/cancers12040976.
2
Recall and Outcome of Screen-detected Microcalcifications during 2 Decades of Mammography Screening in the Netherlands National Breast Screening Program.荷兰国家乳房筛查计划中 20 年乳腺 X 线筛查中检出的微钙化的召回和结果。
Radiology. 2020 Mar;294(3):528-537. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020191266. Epub 2020 Jan 28.
3
How do women experience a false-positive test result from breast screening? A systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies.
女性如何体验乳房筛查的假阳性测试结果?一项定性研究的系统评价和主题综合分析。
Br J Cancer. 2019 Aug;121(4):351-358. doi: 10.1038/s41416-019-0524-4. Epub 2019 Jul 23.
4
Changes in the Utilization of the BI-RADS Category 3 Assessment in Recalled Patients Before and After the Implementation of Screening Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.实施乳腺筛查数字断层合成摄影前后召回患者 BI-RADS 3 类评估的利用变化。
Acad Radiol. 2019 Nov;26(11):1515-1525. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2018.12.020. Epub 2019 Jan 19.
5
Baseline Mammography: What Is It and Why Is It Important? A Cross-Sectional Survey of Women Undergoing Screening Mammography.基线乳房 X 光检查:它是什么,为什么重要?接受筛检性乳房 X 光检查的女性的横断面调查。
J Am Coll Radiol. 2019 Feb;16(2):164-169. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2018.07.002. Epub 2018 Sep 13.
6
Effect of Arrival of Prior Mammograms on Recall Negation for Screening Mammograms Performed With Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in a Clinical Setting.临床应用数字化乳腺断层摄影术进行筛查时,前期乳腺钼靶片对筛查钼靶片召回否定的影响。
J Am Coll Radiol. 2018 Sep;15(9):1293-1299. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2018.05.003. Epub 2018 Jun 29.
7
BI-RADS Category 3 Comparison: Probably Benign Category after Recall from Screening before and after Implementation of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.BI-RADS 3类比较:数字乳腺断层合成技术实施前后筛查召回后可能为良性类别。
Radiology. 2017 Dec;285(3):778-787. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017162837. Epub 2017 Jul 17.
8
The effect of population-based mammography screening in Dutch municipalities on breast cancer mortality: 20 years of follow-up.荷兰各城市基于人群的乳腺钼靶筛查对乳腺癌死亡率的影响:20年随访
Int J Cancer. 2017 Aug 15;141(4):671-677. doi: 10.1002/ijc.30754.
9
Comparison of visibility of circumscribed masses on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) and 2D mammography: are circumscribed masses better visualized and assured of being benign on DBT?数字乳腺断层合成(DBT)与二维乳腺X线摄影对局限性肿块可视性的比较:局限性肿块在DBT上是否能更好地显示并确定为良性?
Eur Radiol. 2017 Feb;27(2):570-577. doi: 10.1007/s00330-016-4420-5. Epub 2016 May 28.
10
Factors Associated With Rates of False-Positive and False-Negative Results From Digital Mammography Screening: An Analysis of Registry Data.数字化乳腺钼靶筛查假阳性和假阴性结果发生率的相关因素:登记数据的分析
Ann Intern Med. 2016 Feb 16;164(4):226-35. doi: 10.7326/M15-0971. Epub 2016 Jan 12.