Petrović Danka, Šćepanović Bojana, Spirovski Milena, Nikin Zoran, Prvulović Bunović Nataša
Department of Radiological Diagnostics, Oncology Institute of Vojvodina, 21204 Sremska Kamenica, Serbia.
Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Novi Sad, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia.
Biomedicines. 2025 Jul 17;13(7):1750. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines13071750.
: The aim of our study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of four imaging modalities-digital mammography (DM), digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), ultrasound (US), and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-applied individually and in combination in early cancer detection in women with dense breasts. : This single-center retrospective study was conducted from January 2021 to September 2024 at the Oncology Institute of Vojvodina in Serbia and included 168 asymptomatic and symptomatic women with dense breasts. Based on the exclusion criteria, the final number of women who were screened with all four imaging methods was 156. The reference standard for checking the diagnostic accuracy of these methods is the result of a histopathological examination, if a biopsy is performed, or a stable radiological finding in the next 12-24 months. : The findings underscore the superior diagnostic performance of breast MRI with the highest sensitivity (95.1%), specificity (78.7%), and overall accuracy (87.2%). In contrast, DM showed the lowest sensitivity (87.7%) and low specificity (49.3%). While the combination of DM + DBT + US demonstrated improved sensitivity to 96.3%, its specificity drastically decreased to 32%, illustrating as ensitivity-specificity trade-off. Notably, the integration of all four modalities increased sensitivity to 97.5% but decreased specificity to 29.3%, suggesting an overdiagnosis risk. DBT significantly improved performance over DM alone, likely due to enhanced tissue differentiation. US proved valuable in dense breast tissue but was associated with a high false-positive rate. Breast MRI, even when used alone, confirmed its status as the gold standard for dense breast imaging. However, its widespread use is constrained by economic and logistical barriers. ROC curve analysis further emphasized MRI's diagnostic superiority (AUC = 0.958) compared with US (0.863), DBT (0.828), and DM (0.820). : This study provides a unique, comprehensive comparison of all four imaging modalities within the same patient cohort, offering a rare model for optimizing diagnostic pathways in women with dense breasts. The findings support the strategic integration of complementary imaging approaches to improve early cancer detection while highlighting the risk of increased false-positive rates. In settings where MRI is not readily accessible, a combined DM + DBT + US protocol may serve as a pragmatic alternative, though its limitations in specificity must be carefully considered.
我们研究的目的是评估四种成像方式——数字乳腺钼靶(DM)、数字乳腺断层合成(DBT)、超声(US)和乳腺磁共振成像(MRI)——单独及联合应用于致密型乳腺女性早期癌症检测的诊断准确性。
这项单中心回顾性研究于2021年1月至2024年9月在塞尔维亚伏伊伏丁那肿瘤研究所进行,纳入了168例有症状和无症状的致密型乳腺女性。根据排除标准,最终用所有四种成像方法进行筛查的女性数量为156例。检查这些方法诊断准确性的参考标准是组织病理学检查结果(如果进行了活检),或者在接下来12 - 24个月内稳定的影像学表现。
研究结果强调了乳腺MRI卓越的诊断性能,其敏感性最高(95.1%)、特异性(78.7%)和总体准确性(87.2%)。相比之下,DM的敏感性最低(87.7%)且特异性较低(49.3%)。虽然DM + DBT + US联合应用时敏感性提高到了96.3%,但其特异性急剧下降至32%,显示出敏感性与特异性之间的权衡。值得注意的是,四种成像方式联合应用时敏感性提高到了97.5%,但特异性降至29.3%,提示存在过度诊断风险。DBT相比单独使用DM显著提高了性能,可能是由于组织分辨能力增强。US在致密型乳腺组织中被证明有价值,但假阳性率较高。乳腺MRI即使单独使用,也证实了其作为致密型乳腺成像金标准的地位。然而,其广泛应用受到经济和后勤方面的限制。ROC曲线分析进一步强调了MRI与US(0.863)、DBT(0.828)和DM(0.820)相比具有诊断优势(AUC = 0.958)。
本研究在同一患者队列中对所有四种成像方式进行了独特、全面的比较,为优化致密型乳腺女性的诊断途径提供了一个难得的模型。研究结果支持采用互补成像方法进行战略整合以改善早期癌症检测,同时突出了假阳性率增加的风险。在无法轻易获得MRI的情况下,DM + DBT + US联合方案可能是一种实用的替代方法,但其在特异性方面的局限性必须仔细考虑。