Screening for Breast Cancer with Contrast-enhanced Mammography as an Alternative to MRI: SCEMAM Trial Results.

IF 12.1 1区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Radiology Pub Date : 2025-06-01 DOI:10.1148/radiol.242634
Wendie A Berg, Adrienne Vargo, Amy H Lu, Jeremy M Berg, Andriy I Bandos, Jamie Y Hartman, Margarita L Zuley, Marie A Ganott, Amy E Kelly, Bronwyn E Nair, Denise M Chough, Ruthane F Reginella, Luisa P Wallace, Kimberly S Harnist, Beatrice A Carlin, Cathy S Cohen, Christiane M Hakim, Jules H Sumkin
{"title":"Screening for Breast Cancer with Contrast-enhanced Mammography as an Alternative to MRI: SCEMAM Trial Results.","authors":"Wendie A Berg, Adrienne Vargo, Amy H Lu, Jeremy M Berg, Andriy I Bandos, Jamie Y Hartman, Margarita L Zuley, Marie A Ganott, Amy E Kelly, Bronwyn E Nair, Denise M Chough, Ruthane F Reginella, Luisa P Wallace, Kimberly S Harnist, Beatrice A Carlin, Cathy S Cohen, Christiane M Hakim, Jules H Sumkin","doi":"10.1148/radiol.242634","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Background Many state laws require insurance coverage for supplemental screening MRI in women at elevated risk for breast cancer, but MRI capacity is limited. Purpose To evaluate the impact of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) on incremental cancer detection rate (ICDR), false-positive rate (FPR) due to recall, and positive predictive value of biopsies performed (PPV3) when added to digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in women eligible for screening MRI. Materials and Methods From March 2021 to December 2022, 615 eligible women were prospectively recruited and consented to a single screening CEM examination with clinical DBT. Two radiologists interpreted each imaging study: Reader 1 recorded DBT findings first, and reader 2 recorded CEM findings first. Incremental cancer detection rate, cancer type and/or nodal status, FPR, PPV3, interval cancer rate, and areas under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) based on forced Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System assessments were evaluated. Results Six hundred one women (mean age, 56 years [range: 30-75 years]) completed CEM. Twelve of the 601 women (2.0%) were diagnosed with 16 malignant lesions; cancers in five of the 12 women (42%) were detected by reader 1 at DBT, and one was detected at DBT by reader 2 (also seen on CEM by both observers). Cancers in the other six women were identified only with CEM (ICDR, six per 601 or 10.0 per 1000 women [95% CI: 3.3, 18.3]): five had invasive disease, all node negative, with a median lesion size of 0.7 cm (range: 0.4-1.1 cm); three were lobular. The FPR of combined DBT plus CEM was 127 of 589 (21.6%) for reader 1, which was an increase of 13.4% (95% CI: 10.8, 16.4) over DBT alone at 48 of 589 (8.1%). Despite increased FPR, the addition of CEM improved the overall AUC for reader 1 to 0.92 versus 0.73 for DBT alone (<i>P</i> = .016). Among the 601 women, 50 (8.3%) were recommended for biopsy according to CEM by reader 1, and six of the 50 (12%) were diagnosed with cancer. At the lesion level, the PPV3 was seven of 62 (11%) for biopsies prompted only with CEM by reader 1. There were no interval cancers at 1 year. Conclusion A significant increase in the detection of early-stage breast cancer was achieved using CEM after DBT. Despite substantially increasing the FPR, adding CEM to DBT improved the overall AUC by 0.19. ClinicalTrials.gov registration no.: NCT04764292 © RSNA, 2025 <i>Supplemental material is available for this article</i>.</p>","PeriodicalId":20896,"journal":{"name":"Radiology","volume":"315 3","pages":"e242634"},"PeriodicalIF":12.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.242634","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Many state laws require insurance coverage for supplemental screening MRI in women at elevated risk for breast cancer, but MRI capacity is limited. Purpose To evaluate the impact of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) on incremental cancer detection rate (ICDR), false-positive rate (FPR) due to recall, and positive predictive value of biopsies performed (PPV3) when added to digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in women eligible for screening MRI. Materials and Methods From March 2021 to December 2022, 615 eligible women were prospectively recruited and consented to a single screening CEM examination with clinical DBT. Two radiologists interpreted each imaging study: Reader 1 recorded DBT findings first, and reader 2 recorded CEM findings first. Incremental cancer detection rate, cancer type and/or nodal status, FPR, PPV3, interval cancer rate, and areas under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) based on forced Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System assessments were evaluated. Results Six hundred one women (mean age, 56 years [range: 30-75 years]) completed CEM. Twelve of the 601 women (2.0%) were diagnosed with 16 malignant lesions; cancers in five of the 12 women (42%) were detected by reader 1 at DBT, and one was detected at DBT by reader 2 (also seen on CEM by both observers). Cancers in the other six women were identified only with CEM (ICDR, six per 601 or 10.0 per 1000 women [95% CI: 3.3, 18.3]): five had invasive disease, all node negative, with a median lesion size of 0.7 cm (range: 0.4-1.1 cm); three were lobular. The FPR of combined DBT plus CEM was 127 of 589 (21.6%) for reader 1, which was an increase of 13.4% (95% CI: 10.8, 16.4) over DBT alone at 48 of 589 (8.1%). Despite increased FPR, the addition of CEM improved the overall AUC for reader 1 to 0.92 versus 0.73 for DBT alone (P = .016). Among the 601 women, 50 (8.3%) were recommended for biopsy according to CEM by reader 1, and six of the 50 (12%) were diagnosed with cancer. At the lesion level, the PPV3 was seven of 62 (11%) for biopsies prompted only with CEM by reader 1. There were no interval cancers at 1 year. Conclusion A significant increase in the detection of early-stage breast cancer was achieved using CEM after DBT. Despite substantially increasing the FPR, adding CEM to DBT improved the overall AUC by 0.19. ClinicalTrials.gov registration no.: NCT04764292 © RSNA, 2025 Supplemental material is available for this article.

对比增强乳房x线摄影作为MRI的替代筛查乳腺癌:SCEMAM试验结果。
背景:许多州的法律要求对乳腺癌高风险妇女进行补充MRI筛查的保险范围,但MRI能力有限。目的评估对比增强乳房x线摄影(CEM)对符合MRI筛查条件的女性的增量癌症检出率(ICDR)、召回引起的假阳性率(FPR)和活检阳性预测值(PPV3)的影响。材料和方法从2021年3月至2022年12月,前瞻性招募615名符合条件的女性,并同意进行临床DBT的单一筛查CEM检查。两名放射科医生解释每项影像学研究:读者1首先记录DBT结果,读者2首先记录CEM结果。基于强迫乳房成像报告和数据系统评估,评估增量癌症检出率、癌症类型和/或淋巴结状态、FPR、PPV3、间隔癌率和受试者工作特征曲线下面积(aus)。结果6101例女性完成了CEM,平均年龄56岁,年龄范围30 ~ 75岁。601名妇女中有12名(2.0%)被诊断为16个恶性病变;12名妇女中有5名(42%)的癌症是由阅读器1在DBT检测到的,1名是由阅读器2在DBT检测到的(两名观察者也在CEM上看到)。其他6名女性的癌症仅被诊断为CEM (ICDR,每601名女性中有6名或每1000名女性中有10.0名[95% CI: 3.3, 18.3]): 5名患有侵袭性疾病,均为淋巴结阴性,中位病变大小为0.7厘米(范围:0.4-1.1厘米);其中三个是小叶。阅读器1联合DBT + CEM的FPR为127 / 589(21.6%),比单独DBT的48 / 589(8.1%)增加13.4% (95% CI: 10.8, 16.4)。尽管增加了FPR,但添加CEM将阅读器1的总体AUC提高到0.92,而单独DBT的AUC为0.73 (P = 0.016)。在601名女性中,读者1根据CEM推荐50名(8.3%)进行活检,其中6名(12%)被诊断患有癌症。在病变水平上,只有CEM提示的活检62例中PPV3为7例(11%)。1年内没有间隔期癌症。结论DBT后CEM对早期乳腺癌的检出率有明显提高。尽管大幅度提高了FPR,但在DBT中加入CEM使总体AUC提高了0.19。ClinicalTrials.gov注册号:: NCT04764292©RSNA, 2025本文提供补充材料。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Radiology
Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
35.20
自引率
3.00%
发文量
596
审稿时长
3.6 months
期刊介绍: Published regularly since 1923 by the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA), Radiology has long been recognized as the authoritative reference for the most current, clinically relevant and highest quality research in the field of radiology. Each month the journal publishes approximately 240 pages of peer-reviewed original research, authoritative reviews, well-balanced commentary on significant articles, and expert opinion on new techniques and technologies. Radiology publishes cutting edge and impactful imaging research articles in radiology and medical imaging in order to help improve human health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信