{"title":"从英国国家乳腺筛查计划中单一中心的间隔期乳腺癌成像审查中汲取的经验教训","authors":"Jia Mang Lee, Palida Jantarang, Bhavani Rengabashyam","doi":"10.1055/s-0043-1778633","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"False-negative mammograms are a part of any screening program and the National Breast Screening Program in the United Kingdom is no exception. Every year, 2.5 million women have screening mammograms in the United Kingdom. Around 8 per 1,000 women screened are diagnosed with a breast cancer and 3 per 1,000 women will present with an interval breast cancer following a negative screening mammogram and before their next mammogram.Robust quality standards have to be adhered to at every stage in the screening pathway in order to maintain the fine balance between detecting cancers early and avoiding unnecessary false-positive results. As part of this process, there is a mandatory requirement for screening units to review all breast cancers. We present a pictorial illustration of the lessons learnt from such a review in this essay. The cases described here are from one large breast screening unit in the North of England. In this unit, 30,000 to 40,000 women have a screening mammogram each year and these are all double read by human readers. All cases requiring recall and those where there is a disagreement between the first and second human reader go through a consensus/arbitration process involving a minimum of two human readers. Interval cancers are identified through a consistent process outlined by the screening program and are then subjected to a review by a minimum of two reviewers. In this process, the reviewers have access to the false-negative mammograms along with all priors that were available at the time of initial read. The reviewers make a decision on whether the initial mammogram is normal or abnormal without seeing the diagnostic mammogram with the interval cancer. They also categorize the density of the breast and describe the mammographic abnormality if there is any on a standardized interval cancer data collection form. Finally, they categorize the interval cancer into one of three types—“satisfactory,” “satisfactory with learning points,” or “unsatisfactory.”","PeriodicalId":51597,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lessons Learnt from Imaging Review of Interval Breast Cancers in a Single Center in the UK National Breast Screening Program\",\"authors\":\"Jia Mang Lee, Palida Jantarang, Bhavani Rengabashyam\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0043-1778633\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"False-negative mammograms are a part of any screening program and the National Breast Screening Program in the United Kingdom is no exception. Every year, 2.5 million women have screening mammograms in the United Kingdom. Around 8 per 1,000 women screened are diagnosed with a breast cancer and 3 per 1,000 women will present with an interval breast cancer following a negative screening mammogram and before their next mammogram.Robust quality standards have to be adhered to at every stage in the screening pathway in order to maintain the fine balance between detecting cancers early and avoiding unnecessary false-positive results. As part of this process, there is a mandatory requirement for screening units to review all breast cancers. We present a pictorial illustration of the lessons learnt from such a review in this essay. The cases described here are from one large breast screening unit in the North of England. In this unit, 30,000 to 40,000 women have a screening mammogram each year and these are all double read by human readers. All cases requiring recall and those where there is a disagreement between the first and second human reader go through a consensus/arbitration process involving a minimum of two human readers. Interval cancers are identified through a consistent process outlined by the screening program and are then subjected to a review by a minimum of two reviewers. In this process, the reviewers have access to the false-negative mammograms along with all priors that were available at the time of initial read. The reviewers make a decision on whether the initial mammogram is normal or abnormal without seeing the diagnostic mammogram with the interval cancer. They also categorize the density of the breast and describe the mammographic abnormality if there is any on a standardized interval cancer data collection form. Finally, they categorize the interval cancer into one of three types—“satisfactory,” “satisfactory with learning points,” or “unsatisfactory.”\",\"PeriodicalId\":51597,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1778633\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1778633","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
假阴性乳房 X 光照片是任何筛查计划的一部分,英国的国家乳房筛查计划也不例外。每年,英国有 250 万名妇女接受乳房 X 光筛查。每 1000 名接受筛查的妇女中约有 8 人被确诊为乳腺癌,每 1000 名妇女中约有 3 人在乳房 X 线造影检查阴性后和下次乳房 X 线造影检查前出现间歇性乳腺癌。筛查过程中的每个阶段都必须遵守严格的质量标准,以便在早期发现癌症和避免不必要的假阳性结果之间保持微妙的平衡。作为这一过程的一部分,筛查单位必须对所有乳腺癌进行复查。我们将在本文中以图解的形式介绍从这种审查中吸取的经验教训。本文描述的病例来自英格兰北部的一个大型乳腺筛查单位。在这个单位,每年有 30,000 到 40,000 名妇女接受乳腺 X 线造影筛查,所有这些都由人工读片员进行双重读片。所有需要召回的病例以及第一位和第二位人类读片员意见不一致的病例都要经过至少两位人类读片员参与的共识/仲裁程序。间隔期癌症是通过筛查计划所规定的统一程序来确定的,然后由至少两名审查员进行审查。在这一过程中,复查人员可以看到假阴性乳房 X 线照片,以及初查时的所有先验资料。复查人员在没有看到间期癌症的诊断性乳房 X 线照片的情况下,就会对初始乳房 X 线照片是正常还是异常做出判断。他们还会对乳房的密度进行分类,并在标准的间期癌症数据收集表上描述乳房X光检查的异常情况(如果有的话)。最后,他们将间隔期癌症分为三种类型--"满意"、"满意并有学习点 "或 "不满意"。
Lessons Learnt from Imaging Review of Interval Breast Cancers in a Single Center in the UK National Breast Screening Program
False-negative mammograms are a part of any screening program and the National Breast Screening Program in the United Kingdom is no exception. Every year, 2.5 million women have screening mammograms in the United Kingdom. Around 8 per 1,000 women screened are diagnosed with a breast cancer and 3 per 1,000 women will present with an interval breast cancer following a negative screening mammogram and before their next mammogram.Robust quality standards have to be adhered to at every stage in the screening pathway in order to maintain the fine balance between detecting cancers early and avoiding unnecessary false-positive results. As part of this process, there is a mandatory requirement for screening units to review all breast cancers. We present a pictorial illustration of the lessons learnt from such a review in this essay. The cases described here are from one large breast screening unit in the North of England. In this unit, 30,000 to 40,000 women have a screening mammogram each year and these are all double read by human readers. All cases requiring recall and those where there is a disagreement between the first and second human reader go through a consensus/arbitration process involving a minimum of two human readers. Interval cancers are identified through a consistent process outlined by the screening program and are then subjected to a review by a minimum of two reviewers. In this process, the reviewers have access to the false-negative mammograms along with all priors that were available at the time of initial read. The reviewers make a decision on whether the initial mammogram is normal or abnormal without seeing the diagnostic mammogram with the interval cancer. They also categorize the density of the breast and describe the mammographic abnormality if there is any on a standardized interval cancer data collection form. Finally, they categorize the interval cancer into one of three types—“satisfactory,” “satisfactory with learning points,” or “unsatisfactory.”