309例乳腺超声检查结果可疑的女性对比增强光谱钼靶摄影的阴性预测价值和特异性

T. Emory, N. Hoven, Michael Nelson, A. Church, N. Rubin, J. Kuehn-Hajder
{"title":"309例乳腺超声检查结果可疑的女性对比增强光谱钼靶摄影的阴性预测价值和特异性","authors":"T. Emory, N. Hoven, Michael Nelson, A. Church, N. Rubin, J. Kuehn-Hajder","doi":"10.21037/ABS-20-91","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: There are ongoing efforts to discover readily available noninvasive techniques to accurately exclude the presence of cancer when a suspicious breast lesion is identified. In order to be useful, such a technique must also accurately exclude a sizeable number of women who would have been otherwise biopsied. Therefore, such a test should have a high negative predictive value in excluding malignancy and a high enough specificity in predicting which women will turn out to have a benign biopsy result. The goal of this study was to investigate the negative predictive value and specificity of contrast enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) in women with a suspicious finding on diagnostic mammography and ultrasound. Methods: With IRB approval, CESM reports from two academic breast centers were retrospectively evaluated. Four hundred and twenty-four women were identified, and 309 women met inclusion criteria. All women had a suspicious finding on diagnostic mammography and ultrasound and had CESM prior to a same day scheduled ultrasound guided core needle biopsy. Results: Two hundred/309 (65%) women had histologically proven malignancy and 109/309 (35%) women had benign results. One hundred and ninety-seven/200 cancers enhanced at CESM [sensitivity 98.5%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 95.7–99.7%]. Fifty-eight/109 women with benign results did not enhance and were true negatives (specificity 53.2%; 95% CI: 43.4–62.8%). Of the 248 women with CESM lesion enhancement, 197/248 were cancer (positive predictive value =79.4%; 95% CI: 76.0–82.5%). Of the 61 women without lesion enhancement on CESM, 58/61 were benign (negative predictive value =95.1%; 95% CI: 86.1–98.4%). The 3 false negatives consisted of 2 sub centimeter Nottingham grade 1/3 estrogen receptor (ER) positive HER2/neu negative invasive mammary cancers of no special type, and one case of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in a papilloma which was 3 mm in size at excision. Conclusions: CESM was accurate in excluding malignancy in over half of the women that had otherwise suspicious findings at diagnostic mammography and ultrasound. 12 fibrocystic changes, 5 of 8 papillomas, 1 of 8 stromal fibrosis, and 4 of 7 sclerosing adenosis results.","PeriodicalId":72212,"journal":{"name":"Annals of breast surgery : an open access journal to bridge breast surgeons across the world","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Negative predictive value and specificity of contrast enhanced spectral mammography in 309 women with suspicious findings at breast ultrasound\",\"authors\":\"T. Emory, N. Hoven, Michael Nelson, A. Church, N. Rubin, J. Kuehn-Hajder\",\"doi\":\"10.21037/ABS-20-91\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: There are ongoing efforts to discover readily available noninvasive techniques to accurately exclude the presence of cancer when a suspicious breast lesion is identified. In order to be useful, such a technique must also accurately exclude a sizeable number of women who would have been otherwise biopsied. Therefore, such a test should have a high negative predictive value in excluding malignancy and a high enough specificity in predicting which women will turn out to have a benign biopsy result. The goal of this study was to investigate the negative predictive value and specificity of contrast enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) in women with a suspicious finding on diagnostic mammography and ultrasound. Methods: With IRB approval, CESM reports from two academic breast centers were retrospectively evaluated. Four hundred and twenty-four women were identified, and 309 women met inclusion criteria. All women had a suspicious finding on diagnostic mammography and ultrasound and had CESM prior to a same day scheduled ultrasound guided core needle biopsy. Results: Two hundred/309 (65%) women had histologically proven malignancy and 109/309 (35%) women had benign results. One hundred and ninety-seven/200 cancers enhanced at CESM [sensitivity 98.5%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 95.7–99.7%]. Fifty-eight/109 women with benign results did not enhance and were true negatives (specificity 53.2%; 95% CI: 43.4–62.8%). Of the 248 women with CESM lesion enhancement, 197/248 were cancer (positive predictive value =79.4%; 95% CI: 76.0–82.5%). Of the 61 women without lesion enhancement on CESM, 58/61 were benign (negative predictive value =95.1%; 95% CI: 86.1–98.4%). The 3 false negatives consisted of 2 sub centimeter Nottingham grade 1/3 estrogen receptor (ER) positive HER2/neu negative invasive mammary cancers of no special type, and one case of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in a papilloma which was 3 mm in size at excision. Conclusions: CESM was accurate in excluding malignancy in over half of the women that had otherwise suspicious findings at diagnostic mammography and ultrasound. 12 fibrocystic changes, 5 of 8 papillomas, 1 of 8 stromal fibrosis, and 4 of 7 sclerosing adenosis results.\",\"PeriodicalId\":72212,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of breast surgery : an open access journal to bridge breast surgeons across the world\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of breast surgery : an open access journal to bridge breast surgeons across the world\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21037/ABS-20-91\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of breast surgery : an open access journal to bridge breast surgeons across the world","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/ABS-20-91","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:目前正在努力发现容易获得的无创技术,以在发现可疑乳腺病变时准确排除癌症的存在。为了有用,这种技术还必须准确地排除大量本来会进行活检的女性。因此,这种检测在排除恶性肿瘤方面应该有很高的阴性预测价值,在预测哪些女性会得到良性活检结果方面应该有足够高的特异性。本研究的目的是研究对比度增强光谱乳腺摄影术(CESM)对诊断性乳腺摄影和超声发现可疑的女性的阴性预测价值和特异性。方法:在IRB批准的情况下,对来自两个学术乳腺中心的CESM报告进行回顾性评估。确定了424名妇女,309名妇女符合入选标准。所有女性在诊断性乳房X光检查和超声检查中都有可疑发现,并在同一天进行超声引导的核心针活检之前进行了CESM。结果:2309/309(65%)名妇女经组织学证实为恶性,109/309(35%)名妇女为良性。1097/200例癌症在CESM中增强[敏感性98.5%;95%置信区间(CI):95.7–99.7%]。有良性结果的女性中,有58例没有增强,为真阴性(特异性53.2%;95%可信区间:43.4–62.8%)。在有CESM病变增强的248名女性中,197/248为癌症(阳性预测值=79.4%;95%CI:76.0–82.5%)。在CESM上没有病变增强的61名女性中,58/61为良性(阴性预测值=95.1%;95%CI:86.1–98.4%),1例乳头状瘤中的导管原位癌(DCIS),切除时大小为3mm。结论:在超过一半的女性中,CESM在排除恶性肿瘤方面是准确的,这些女性在诊断性乳房X光检查和超声检查中有其他可疑的发现。纤维囊性改变12例,乳头状瘤8例中5例,间质纤维化8例中1例,硬化性腺病7例中4例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Negative predictive value and specificity of contrast enhanced spectral mammography in 309 women with suspicious findings at breast ultrasound
Background: There are ongoing efforts to discover readily available noninvasive techniques to accurately exclude the presence of cancer when a suspicious breast lesion is identified. In order to be useful, such a technique must also accurately exclude a sizeable number of women who would have been otherwise biopsied. Therefore, such a test should have a high negative predictive value in excluding malignancy and a high enough specificity in predicting which women will turn out to have a benign biopsy result. The goal of this study was to investigate the negative predictive value and specificity of contrast enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) in women with a suspicious finding on diagnostic mammography and ultrasound. Methods: With IRB approval, CESM reports from two academic breast centers were retrospectively evaluated. Four hundred and twenty-four women were identified, and 309 women met inclusion criteria. All women had a suspicious finding on diagnostic mammography and ultrasound and had CESM prior to a same day scheduled ultrasound guided core needle biopsy. Results: Two hundred/309 (65%) women had histologically proven malignancy and 109/309 (35%) women had benign results. One hundred and ninety-seven/200 cancers enhanced at CESM [sensitivity 98.5%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 95.7–99.7%]. Fifty-eight/109 women with benign results did not enhance and were true negatives (specificity 53.2%; 95% CI: 43.4–62.8%). Of the 248 women with CESM lesion enhancement, 197/248 were cancer (positive predictive value =79.4%; 95% CI: 76.0–82.5%). Of the 61 women without lesion enhancement on CESM, 58/61 were benign (negative predictive value =95.1%; 95% CI: 86.1–98.4%). The 3 false negatives consisted of 2 sub centimeter Nottingham grade 1/3 estrogen receptor (ER) positive HER2/neu negative invasive mammary cancers of no special type, and one case of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in a papilloma which was 3 mm in size at excision. Conclusions: CESM was accurate in excluding malignancy in over half of the women that had otherwise suspicious findings at diagnostic mammography and ultrasound. 12 fibrocystic changes, 5 of 8 papillomas, 1 of 8 stromal fibrosis, and 4 of 7 sclerosing adenosis results.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信