Molecular Breast Imaging and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Dense Breast Screening: The Density MATTERS Trial.
IF 15.2
1区 医学
Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Carrie B Hruska, Katie N Hunt, Nicholas B Larson, Patricia A Miller, Richard L Ellis, Robin B Shermis, Gaiane M Rauch, Amy Lynn Conners, Jeannette Gasal Spilde, Dominic T Semaan, Emily C Siegal, Shannon N Zingula, Sabala R Mandava, Tamara S Martin, Riffat K Ahmed, Dana H Whaley, Beatriz E Adrada, Lacey R Gray, Ramila A Mehta, Rebecca J Roll, Roberta E Redfern, Michael K O'Connor, Deborah J Rhodes
下载PDF
{"title":"Molecular Breast Imaging and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Dense Breast Screening: The Density MATTERS Trial.","authors":"Carrie B Hruska, Katie N Hunt, Nicholas B Larson, Patricia A Miller, Richard L Ellis, Robin B Shermis, Gaiane M Rauch, Amy Lynn Conners, Jeannette Gasal Spilde, Dominic T Semaan, Emily C Siegal, Shannon N Zingula, Sabala R Mandava, Tamara S Martin, Riffat K Ahmed, Dana H Whaley, Beatriz E Adrada, Lacey R Gray, Ramila A Mehta, Rebecca J Roll, Roberta E Redfern, Michael K O'Connor, Deborah J Rhodes","doi":"10.1148/radiol.243953","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Background Molecular breast imaging (MBI) relies on the functional uptake of a radiotracer, technetium 99m sestamibi, to reveal cancers that are occult on mammograms due to breast density. Purpose To assess the performance of screening MBI as a supplement to digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in women with dense breasts. Materials and Methods In this prospective, multiyear, multicenter trial from five sites, women with dense breasts were prospectively enrolled from 2017 to 2022 and underwent two annual screening rounds of DBT and MBI to assess the incremental cancer detection rate (CDR, reported as cancers per 1000 screenings) of supplemental MBI and to compare other performance metrics of DBT and MBI. Results A total of 2978 participants were included. Participants had a mean age of 56.8 years ± 9.3 (SD) and a mean lifetime Tyrer-Cuzick risk of 12.0% ± 7.9 (SD). At year 1, the CDR was 5.0‰ (15 of 2978 participants) with DBT and 11.8‰ (35 of 2978 participants) with DBT plus prevalence screening MBI (incremental CDR, 6.7‰ [95% CI: 4.2, 10.6]; <i>P</i> < .001); the invasive CDR was 3.0‰ (nine of 2978 participants) with DBT and 7.7‰ (23 of 2978 participants) with DBT plus prevalence screening MBI (invasive incremental CDR, 4.7‰ [95% CI: 2.7, 8.1]; <i>P</i> < .001). At year 2, the CDR was 5.8‰ (15 of 2590 participants) with DBT and 9.3‰ (24 of 2590 participants) with DBT plus incidence screening MBI (incremental CDR, 3.5‰ [95% CI: 1.7, 6.8]; <i>P</i> = .001); the invasive CDR was 1.5‰ (four of 2590 participants) with DBT and 3.9‰ (10 of 2590 participants) with DBT plus incidence screening MBI (invasive incremental CDR, 2.3‰ [95% CI: 0.9, 5.3]; <i>P</i> = .048). The year 1 recall rate was 8.6% (255 of 2978 participants) with DBT and 17.9% (534 of 2978 participants) with DBT plus prevalence screening MBI (difference, 9.4% [95% CI: 8.4, 10.5]). The year 2 recall rate was 8.9% (231 of 2590 participants) with DBT and 13.8% (356 of 2590 participants) with DBT plus incidence screening MBI (difference, 4.8% [95% CI: 4.1, 5.7]). Twenty-nine participants had cancers detected only with MBI: 21 (72%) had invasive cancers (median size, 0.9 cm), 26 (90%) had node-negative cancers, and six (20%) had advanced cancers. The interval cancer rate was 0.7‰ (two of 2978 participants) in year 1 and 0.8‰ (two of 2590 participants) in year 2. Conclusion The addition of MBI to DBT screening increased invasive cancer detection by 2.5-fold and modestly increased the recall rate at the second screening round. © RSNA, 2025 See also the editorial by Fowler in this issue.</p>","PeriodicalId":20896,"journal":{"name":"Radiology","volume":"316 3","pages":"e243953"},"PeriodicalIF":15.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12501625/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.243953","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
引用
批量引用
Abstract
Background Molecular breast imaging (MBI) relies on the functional uptake of a radiotracer, technetium 99m sestamibi, to reveal cancers that are occult on mammograms due to breast density. Purpose To assess the performance of screening MBI as a supplement to digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in women with dense breasts. Materials and Methods In this prospective, multiyear, multicenter trial from five sites, women with dense breasts were prospectively enrolled from 2017 to 2022 and underwent two annual screening rounds of DBT and MBI to assess the incremental cancer detection rate (CDR, reported as cancers per 1000 screenings) of supplemental MBI and to compare other performance metrics of DBT and MBI. Results A total of 2978 participants were included. Participants had a mean age of 56.8 years ± 9.3 (SD) and a mean lifetime Tyrer-Cuzick risk of 12.0% ± 7.9 (SD). At year 1, the CDR was 5.0‰ (15 of 2978 participants) with DBT and 11.8‰ (35 of 2978 participants) with DBT plus prevalence screening MBI (incremental CDR, 6.7‰ [95% CI: 4.2, 10.6]; P < .001); the invasive CDR was 3.0‰ (nine of 2978 participants) with DBT and 7.7‰ (23 of 2978 participants) with DBT plus prevalence screening MBI (invasive incremental CDR, 4.7‰ [95% CI: 2.7, 8.1]; P < .001). At year 2, the CDR was 5.8‰ (15 of 2590 participants) with DBT and 9.3‰ (24 of 2590 participants) with DBT plus incidence screening MBI (incremental CDR, 3.5‰ [95% CI: 1.7, 6.8]; P = .001); the invasive CDR was 1.5‰ (four of 2590 participants) with DBT and 3.9‰ (10 of 2590 participants) with DBT plus incidence screening MBI (invasive incremental CDR, 2.3‰ [95% CI: 0.9, 5.3]; P = .048). The year 1 recall rate was 8.6% (255 of 2978 participants) with DBT and 17.9% (534 of 2978 participants) with DBT plus prevalence screening MBI (difference, 9.4% [95% CI: 8.4, 10.5]). The year 2 recall rate was 8.9% (231 of 2590 participants) with DBT and 13.8% (356 of 2590 participants) with DBT plus incidence screening MBI (difference, 4.8% [95% CI: 4.1, 5.7]). Twenty-nine participants had cancers detected only with MBI: 21 (72%) had invasive cancers (median size, 0.9 cm), 26 (90%) had node-negative cancers, and six (20%) had advanced cancers. The interval cancer rate was 0.7‰ (two of 2978 participants) in year 1 and 0.8‰ (two of 2590 participants) in year 2. Conclusion The addition of MBI to DBT screening increased invasive cancer detection by 2.5-fold and modestly increased the recall rate at the second screening round. © RSNA, 2025 See also the editorial by Fowler in this issue.
分子乳腺成像和数字乳腺断层合成用于致密乳腺筛查:密度问题试验。
分子乳腺成像(MBI)依赖于放射性示踪剂锝99m sestamibi的功能性摄取,以显示由于乳腺密度而在乳房x线照片上隐匿的癌症。目的评价MBI筛查作为数字乳腺断层合成(DBT)辅助手段在乳腺致密性患者中的应用效果。在这项来自5个地点的前瞻性、多年、多中心试验中,研究人员在2017年至2022年期间前瞻性地招募了乳腺致密的女性,并进行了两轮年度DBT和MBI筛查,以评估补充MBI的增量癌症检出率(CDR,报告为每1000次筛查的癌症数),并比较DBT和MBI的其他性能指标。结果共纳入2978名受试者。参与者的平均年龄为56.8岁±9.3岁(SD),平均一生Tyrer-Cuzick风险为12.0%±7.9 (SD)。在第一年,DBT组的CDR为5.0‰(2978名参与者中有15人),DBT加患病率筛查MBI组的CDR为11.8‰(2978名参与者中有35人)(增量CDR为6.7‰[95% CI: 4.2, 10.6]; P < .001);DBT组有创CDR为3.0‰(9 / 2978),DBT +患病率筛查MBI组有创CDR为7.7‰(23 / 2978)(有创增量CDR为4.7‰[95% CI: 2.7, 8.1]; P < .001)。在第2年,DBT组的CDR为5.8‰(2590名参与者中有15人),DBT加发病率筛查MBI组的CDR为9.3‰(2590名参与者中有24人)(增量CDR为3.5‰[95% CI: 1.7, 6.8]; P = .001);DBT组的有创CDR为1.5‰(4 / 2590),DBT +发病率筛查MBI组的有创CDR为3.9‰(10 / 2590)(有创增量CDR为2.3‰[95% CI: 0.9, 5.3]; P = 0.048)。DBT组1年的召回率为8.6%(2978名参与者中有255人),DBT加患病率筛查MBI组为17.9%(2978名参与者中有534人)(差异为9.4% [95% CI: 8.4, 10.5])。DBT组第2年的回忆率为8.9%(2590名参与者中的231人),DBT加发病率筛查MBI组第2年的回忆率为13.8%(2590名参与者中的356人)(差异为4.8% [95% CI: 4.1, 5.7])。29名参与者仅用MBI检测出癌症:21名(72%)患有侵袭性癌症(中位尺寸为0.9厘米),26名(90%)患有淋巴结阴性癌症,6名(20%)患有晚期癌症。第一年的间隔期癌症发病率为0.7‰(2978名参与者中有2人),第二年为0.8‰(2590名参与者中有2人)。结论在DBT筛查中加入MBI可使浸润性肿瘤检出率提高2.5倍,并可适度提高第二轮筛查时的召回率。©RSNA, 2025参见本期Fowler的社论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。