Suppr超能文献

乳腺癌家族史女性的断层合成成像与数字乳腺摄影筛查对比

Tomosynthesis vs Digital Mammography Screening in Women with a Family History of Breast Cancer.

作者信息

Li Tong, Su Yu-Ru, Lee Janie M, O'Meara Ellen S, Miglioretti Diana L, Kerlikowske Karla, Henderson Louise, Houssami Nehmat

机构信息

The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia.

Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle.

出版信息

JAMA Oncol. 2025 May 22. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2025.1209.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Evidence on screening outcomes with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) vs digital mammography (DM) in women with a family history of breast cancer is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the performance of DBT and DM screening in women with a family history of breast cancer overall and subdivided by breast cancer family history category, breast density, age group, screening interval, and screening round, and to describe characteristics of cancers detected on screening vs interval cancers.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this comparative cohort study at imaging facilities affiliated with the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium, adult women 18 years and older with a self-reported family history of breast cancer who underwent DBT or DM from 2011 to 2018 were included, with a 1-year follow-up for breast carcinoma. Data analysis was performed between November 2023 and August 2024.

EXPOSURES

DBT or DM.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcomes were absolute risk difference (ARD) between DBT and DM for recall rate, cancer detection rate, interval cancer rate, advanced cancer rate, biopsy rate, positive predictive values, sensitivity, and specificity, with inverse probability of treatment weighting.

RESULTS

A total of 208 945 women with a family history of breast cancer undergoing 502 357 screening examinations were included in the sample. Median (IQR) age was 58 (50-66) and 57 (49-66) years for the DBT and DM groups, respectively. Adjusted ARDs (DBT vs DM) were significant for recall rate (-1.51%; 95% CI, -2.42% to -0.59%) and specificity (1.56%; 95% CI, 0.65%-2.46%) in the overall cohort of 121 698 DBT and 380 561 DM examinations and among women with 1 first-degree relative (recall rate ARD, -1.72%; 95% CI, -2.70% to -0.74%; specificity ARD, 1.75%; 95% CI, 0.81%-2.69%). Among those with only second-degree relatives, the biopsy rate for DBT was significantly higher (ARD, 0.39%; 95% CI, 0.18%-0.61%). Significant ARDs were observed for the ductal carcinoma in situ detection rate (-0.71 per 1000 examinations; 95% CI, -1.03 to -0.38 per 1000 examinations) in women with almost entirely fatty breasts; recall rate (-1.90%; 95% CI, -2.88% to -0.92%) and specificity (1.93%; 95% CI, 0.97%-2.89%) in women with scattered fibroglandular densities. Significant ARDs were also observed for the positive predictive value for recall (1.75%; 95% CI, 0.84%-2.67%) in heterogeneously dense breasts, as well as the biopsy rate (0.48%; 95% CI, 0.16%-0.80%) and advanced cancer rate (-0.61 per 1000 examinations; 95% CI, -1.02 to -0.20 per 1000 examinations) in extremely dense breasts. DBT screening had a higher proportion than DM of screen-detected early-stage, invasive cancers with favorable prognostic characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study of women with a family history of breast cancer, DBT screening reduced recall rates and increased specificity compared to DM, particularly in women with 1 first-degree relative with breast cancer and those with scattered fibroglandular breast density, and reduced advanced cancer rates in women with extremely dense breasts.

摘要

重要性

关于乳腺癌家族史女性中数字乳腺断层合成(DBT)与数字乳腺钼靶(DM)筛查结果的证据有限。

目的

比较DBT和DM在有乳腺癌家族史女性总体中的筛查表现,并按乳腺癌家族史类别、乳腺密度、年龄组、筛查间隔和筛查轮次进行细分,描述筛查发现的癌症与间期癌的特征。

设计、地点和参与者:在乳腺癌监测联盟下属影像机构开展的这项比较队列研究中,纳入了2011年至2018年期间接受DBT或DM检查且自我报告有乳腺癌家族史的18岁及以上成年女性,并对乳腺癌进行了1年随访。数据分析于2023年11月至2024年8月进行。

暴露因素

DBT或DM。

主要结局和测量指标

主要结局为DBT和DM在召回率、癌症检出率、间期癌率、进展期癌率、活检率、阳性预测值、敏感性和特异性方面的绝对风险差异(ARD),采用逆概率加权法。

结果

样本共纳入208945名有乳腺癌家族史的女性,她们接受了502357次筛查检查。DBT组和DM组的年龄中位数(四分位间距)分别为58(50 - 66)岁和57(49 - 66)岁。在121698次DBT和380561次DM检查的总体队列中,以及在有1名一级亲属的女性中,调整后的ARD(DBT与DM相比)在召回率(-1.51%;95%CI,-2.42%至-0.59%)和特异性(1.56%;95%CI,0.65% - 2.46%)方面具有统计学意义。在仅有二级亲属的女性中,DBT的活检率显著更高(ARD,0.39%;95%CI,0.18% - 0.61%)。在几乎全为脂肪型乳房的女性中,原位导管癌检出率的ARD具有统计学意义(每1000次检查-0.71;95%CI,每1000次检查-1.03至-0.38);在散在纤维腺体型密度的女性中,召回率(-1.90%;95%CI,-2.88%至-0.92%)和特异性(1.93%;95%CI,0.97% - 2.89%)具有统计学意义。在不均匀致密型乳房中,召回的阳性预测值的ARD也具有统计学意义(1.75%;95%CI,0.84% - 2.67%),在极度致密型乳房中,活检率(0.48%;95%CI,0.16% - 0.80%)和进展期癌率(每1000次检查-0.61;95%CI,每1000次检查-1.02至-0.20)具有统计学意义。DBT筛查发现的具有良好预后特征的早期浸润性癌比例高于DM。

结论和相关性

在这项针对有乳腺癌家族史女性的队列研究中,与DM相比,DBT筛查降低了召回率并提高了特异性,尤其是在有1名患乳腺癌的一级亲属的女性和散在纤维腺体型乳房密度的女性中,并且降低了极度致密型乳房女性的进展期癌率。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6df7/12100508/5fa0f1cf41f7/jamaoncol-e251209-g001.jpg

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