Prospective Comparison of Synthesized Mammography with DBT and Full-Field Digital Mammography with DBT Uncovers Recall Disagreements That may Impact Cancer Detection

• Published in: Academic radiology Vol. 29; no. 7; p. 1039
• Main Authors: Huang, Monica L, Hess, Kenneth, Ma, Junsheng, Santiago, Lumarie, Scoggins, Marion E, Arribas, Elsa, Adrada, Beatriz E, Le-Petross, Huong T, Leung, Jessica W T, Yang, Wei, Geiser, William, Candelaria, Rosalind P
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.07.2022
• Subjects: Digital breast tomosynthesis; Synthesized mammography; Calcifications
• ISSN: 1878-4046
• DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2021.08.004

Synthesized mammography with digital breast tomosynthesis (SM+DBT) and full-field digital mammography with DBT were prospectively evaluated for recall rate (RR), cancer detection rate (CDR), positive predictive value 1 (PPV1), lesion recall differences, and disagreements in recall for additional imaging. From December 15, 2015 to January 15, 2017, after informed consent was obtained for this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act compliant study, each enrolled patient's SM+DBT and FFDM+DBT were interpreted sequentially by one of eight radiologists. RR, CDR, PPV1, and imaging findings (asymmetry, focal asymmetry, mass, architectural distortion, and calcifications) recalled were reviewed. For SM+DBT and FFDM+DBT in 1022 patients, RR was 7.3% and 7.9% (SM+DBT vs. FFDM+DBT: diff= -0.6%; 90% CI= -1.4%, 0.1%); CDR was 6.8 and 7.8 per 1000 (SM+DBT vs. FFDM+DBT: diff= -1.0, 95% CI= -5.5, 2.8, p = 0.317); PPV1 was 9.3% and 9.9% (relative positive predictive value for SM+DBT vs. FFDM+DBT: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.73-1.22, p = 0.669). FFDM+DBT detected eight cancers; SM+DBT detected seven (missed 1 cancer with calcifications). SM+DBT and FFDM+DBT disagreed on patient recall for additional imaging in 19 patients, with majority (68%, 13/19 patients) in the recall of patients for calcifications. For calcifications, SM+DBT recalled six patients that FFDM+DBT did not recall, and FFDM+DBT recalled seven patients that SM+DBT did not recall, even though the total number of calcifications finding recalled was similar overall for both SM+DBT and FFDM+DBT. Disagreement in recall of patients for calcifications may impact cancer detection by SM+DBT, warranting further investigation.