New Technologies in Screening for Breast Cancer: a Systematic Review of Their Accuracy

Overview

Journal Br J Cancer

Specialty Oncology

Date 2004 May 20

PMID 15150556

Citations 15

Authors

L Irwig

N Houssami

C van Vliet

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

We systematically reviewed the literature on the accuracy of new technologies proposed for breast cancer screening. Four potential tests were identified (ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), full-field digital mammography (FFDM), and computer-aided detection (CAD)) for which primary studies met quality and applicability criteria and provided adequate data on test accuracy. These technologies have been assessed in cross-sectional studies of test accuracy where the new test is compared to mammography. Ultrasound, used as an adjunct to mammography in women with radiologically dense breasts, detects additional cancers and causes additional false positives. Magnetic resonance imaging may have a better sensitivity (but lower specificity) than mammography in selected high-risk women, but studies of this technology included small number of cancers. Computer-aided detection may enhance the sensitivity of mammography and warrants further evaluation in large prospective trials. One study of FFDM suggests that it may identify some cancers not identified on conventional mammography and may result in a lower recall rate. The evidence is currently insufficient to support the use of any of these new technologies in population screening, but would support further evaluation.

Citing Articles

Breast thermography: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Goni-Arana A, Perez-Martin J, Diez F Syst Rev. 2024; 13(1):295.

PMID: 39609910 PMC: 11603657. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-024-02708-9.

Changes in Symptom Clusters Among Asian American Breast Cancer Survivors in Technology-Based Coaching Intervention.

Min S, Chee W, Im E Cancer Nurs. 2024; .

PMID: 38232228 PMC: 11252245. DOI: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000001317.

Extensive review on breast cancer its etiology, progression, prognostic markers, and treatment.

Swaminathan H, Saravanamurali K, Yadav S Med Oncol. 2023; 40(8):238.

PMID: 37442848 DOI: 10.1007/s12032-023-02111-9.

Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the Indonesian version for quality of life among breast cancer patients.

Solikhah S, Perwitasari D, Rejeki D Front Public Health. 2023; 11:1069422.

PMID: 36926172 PMC: 10011654. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1069422.

A novel cognitive interpretation of breast cancer thermography with complementary learning fuzzy neural memory structure.

Tan T, Quek C, Ng G, Ng E Expert Syst Appl. 2020; 33(3):652-666.

PMID: 32288331 PMC: 7126614. DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2006.06.012.

References

Birdwell R, Ikeda D, OShaughnessy K, Sickles E . Mammographic characteristics of 115 missed cancers later detected with screening mammography and the potential utility of computer-aided detection. Radiology. 2001; 219(1):192-202. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.219.1.r01ap16192. View

Lewin J, Hendrick R, DOrsi C, Isaacs P, Moss L, Karellas A . Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinations. Radiology. 2001; 218(3):873-80. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.218.3.r01mr29873. View

ODriscoll D, Warren R, Mackay J, Britton P, Day N . Screening with breast ultrasound in a population at moderate risk due to family history. J Med Screen. 2001; 8(2):106-9. DOI: 10.1136/jms.8.2.106. View

Warner E, Plewes D, Shumak R, Catzavelos G, Di Prospero L, Yaffe M . Comparison of breast magnetic resonance imaging, mammography, and ultrasound for surveillance of women at high risk for hereditary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2001; 19(15):3524-31. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2001.19.15.3524. View

Freer T, Ulissey M . Screening mammography with computer-aided detection: prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast center. Radiology. 2001; 220(3):781-6. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2203001282. View

Hunink M, Krestin G . Study design for concurrent development, assessment, and implementation of new diagnostic imaging technology. Radiology. 2002; 222(3):604-14. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2223010335. View

Nystrom L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, Frisell J, Nordenskjold B, Rutqvist L . Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet. 2002; 359(9310):909-19. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08020-0. View

Hou M, Chuang H, Ou-Yang F, Wang C, Chuang C, Wang J . Comparison of breast mammography, sonography and physical examination for screening women at high risk of breast cancer in taiwan. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2002; 28(4):415-20. DOI: 10.1016/s0301-5629(02)00483-0. View

Lewin J, DOrsi C, Hendrick R, Moss L, Isaacs P, Karellas A . Clinical comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for detection of breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002; 179(3):671-7. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.179.3.1790671. View

10.

Bossuyt P, Reitsma J, Bruns D, Gatsonis C, Glasziou P, Irwig L . Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD Initiative. Radiology. 2003; 226(1):24-8. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2261021292. View

11.

Chock C, Irwig L, Berry G, Glasziou P . Comparing dichotomous screening tests when individuals negative on both tests are not verified. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997; 50(11):1211-7. DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(97)00122-4. View

12.

Kolb T, LICHY J, Newhouse J . Occult cancer in women with dense breasts: detection with screening US--diagnostic yield and tumor characteristics. Radiology. 1998; 207(1):191-9. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.207.1.9530316. View

13.

Te Brake G, Karssemeijer N, Hendriks J . Automated detection of breast carcinomas not detected in a screening program. Radiology. 1998; 207(2):465-71. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.207.2.9577496. View

14.

Buchberger W, Springer P, Obrist P, Dunser M . Incidental findings on sonography of the breast: clinical significance and diagnostic workup. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999; 173(4):921-7. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.173.4.10511149. View

15.

Tilanus-Linthorst M, BARTELS C, Obdeijn A, Oudkerk M . Earlier detection of breast cancer by surveillance of women at familial risk. Eur J Cancer. 2000; 36(4):514-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0959-8049(99)00337-8. View

16.

Kuhl C, Schmutzler R, Leutner C, Kempe A, Wardelmann E, Hocke A . Breast MR imaging screening in 192 women proved or suspected to be carriers of a breast cancer susceptibility gene: preliminary results. Radiology. 2001; 215(1):267-79. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.215.1.r00ap01267. View

17.

Warren Burhenne L, Wood S, DOrsi C, Feig S, Kopans D, OShaughnessy K . Potential contribution of computer-aided detection to the sensitivity of screening mammography. Radiology. 2000; 215(2):554-62. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.215.2.r00ma15554. View

18.

Brown J, Buckley D, Coulthard A, Dixon A, Dixon J, Easton D . Magnetic resonance imaging screening in women at genetic risk of breast cancer: imaging and analysis protocol for the UK multicentre study. UK MRI Breast Screening Study Advisory Group. Magn Reson Imaging. 2000; 18(7):765-76. DOI: 10.1016/s0730-725x(00)00167-3. View

19.

Tilanus-Linthorst M, Obdeijn I, Bartels K, de Koning H, Oudkerk M . First experiences in screening women at high risk for breast cancer with MR imaging. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2000; 63(1):53-60. DOI: 10.1023/a:1006480106487. View

20.

Yasuda S, Ide M, Fujii H, Nakahara T, Mochizuki Y, Takahashi W . Application of positron emission tomography imaging to cancer screening. Br J Cancer. 2000; 83(12):1607-11. PMC: 2363454. DOI: 10.1054/bjoc.2000.1496. View