Screening outcome in women repeatedly recalled for the same mammographic abnormality before, during and after the transition from screen-film to full-field digital screening mammography

Rob van Bommel; Adri C. Voogd; Marieke W. Louwman; Luc J. Strobbe; Dick Venderink; Lucien E. M. Duijm

doi:10.1007/s00330-016-4399-y

Screening outcome in women repeatedly recalled for the same mammographic abnormality before, during and after the transition from screen-film to full-field digital screening mammography

Rob van Bommel, Adri C. Voogd, Marieke W. Louwman, Luc J. Strobbe, Dick Venderink, Lucien E. M. Duijm^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

Abstract

The aim of this study was to retrospectively determine screening outcome in women recalled twice for the same mammographic lesion before, during, and after transition from screen-film (SFM) to full-field digital screening mammography (FFDM).

We included women with a repeated recall for the same mammographic abnormality (37 at subsequent SFM-screening, obtained between January 2000-April 2010; respectively 54 and 65 women with a prior SFM-screen or FFDM-screen followed by subsequent FFDM-screening, obtained between May 2009-July 2013).

At SFM-screening, repeated recalls for the same lesion comprised 1.2 % of recalls (37/3217), including 13 malignancies (positive predictive value (PPV), 35.1 %). During the SFM to FFDM transition (SFM-screen followed by FFDM-screen), FFDM recalls comprised more repeated recalls for the same lesion (2.2 %, P = 0.002), with a lower PPV (14.8 %, P = 0.02). This proportion increased to 2.8 % after transition to FFDM (i.e., two successive FFDM-screens), with 16 malignancies (PPV, 24.6 %). Invasive cancers at repeated recall were smaller than interval cancers (T1a-c, 79.4 versus 46.8 %, P = 0.001), with less lymph node involvement (20.6 versus 46.5 %, P = 0.007).

More women are repeatedly recalled for the same mammographic abnormality during and after the transition from SFM to FFDM-screening, with comparable cancer risks before and after the transition. These cancers show better prognostic characteristics than interval cancers.

aEuro cent FFDM-screening increases the number of repeated recalls for the same mammographic abnormality.

aEuro cent The PPV of these recalls is comparable before and after transition to FFDM-screening.

aEuro cent Cancers diagnosed after a repeated recall are smaller than interval cancers.

aEuro cent These cancers also show less lymph node involvement than interval cancers.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	553-561
Number of pages	9
Journal	European Radiology
Volume	27
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4399-y
Publication status	Published - Feb 2017

Keywords

Breast cancer
Mass screening
Mammography
Referral and consultation
Early detection of cancer
INTERVAL BREAST CANCERS
MISSED INTERVAL
RE-ATTENDANCE
PROGRAM
NETHERLANDS
SURVIVAL
PERFORMANCE
SURGERY
IMPACT
STAGE

Access to Document

10.1007/s00330-016-4399-y

Cite this

@article{9f345ba9ef3a4db4991253072a0d4d55,

title = "Screening outcome in women repeatedly recalled for the same mammographic abnormality before, during and after the transition from screen-film to full-field digital screening mammography",

abstract = "The aim of this study was to retrospectively determine screening outcome in women recalled twice for the same mammographic lesion before, during, and after transition from screen-film (SFM) to full-field digital screening mammography (FFDM).We included women with a repeated recall for the same mammographic abnormality (37 at subsequent SFM-screening, obtained between January 2000-April 2010; respectively 54 and 65 women with a prior SFM-screen or FFDM-screen followed by subsequent FFDM-screening, obtained between May 2009-July 2013).At SFM-screening, repeated recalls for the same lesion comprised 1.2 % of recalls (37/3217), including 13 malignancies (positive predictive value (PPV), 35.1 %). During the SFM to FFDM transition (SFM-screen followed by FFDM-screen), FFDM recalls comprised more repeated recalls for the same lesion (2.2 %, P = 0.002), with a lower PPV (14.8 %, P = 0.02). This proportion increased to 2.8 % after transition to FFDM (i.e., two successive FFDM-screens), with 16 malignancies (PPV, 24.6 %). Invasive cancers at repeated recall were smaller than interval cancers (T1a-c, 79.4 versus 46.8 %, P = 0.001), with less lymph node involvement (20.6 versus 46.5 %, P = 0.007).More women are repeatedly recalled for the same mammographic abnormality during and after the transition from SFM to FFDM-screening, with comparable cancer risks before and after the transition. These cancers show better prognostic characteristics than interval cancers.aEuro cent FFDM-screening increases the number of repeated recalls for the same mammographic abnormality.aEuro cent The PPV of these recalls is comparable before and after transition to FFDM-screening.aEuro cent Cancers diagnosed after a repeated recall are smaller than interval cancers.aEuro cent These cancers also show less lymph node involvement than interval cancers.",

keywords = "Breast cancer, Mass screening, Mammography, Referral and consultation, Early detection of cancer, INTERVAL BREAST CANCERS, MISSED INTERVAL, RE-ATTENDANCE, PROGRAM, NETHERLANDS, SURVIVAL, PERFORMANCE, SURGERY, IMPACT, STAGE",

author = "{van Bommel}, Rob and Voogd, {Adri C.} and Louwman, {Marieke W.} and Strobbe, {Luc J.} and Dick Venderink and Duijm, {Lucien E. M.}",

year = "2017",

month = feb,

doi = "10.1007/s00330-016-4399-y",

language = "English",

volume = "27",

pages = "553--561",

journal = "European Radiology",

issn = "0938-7994",

publisher = "Springer, Cham",

number = "2",

}

Screening outcome in women repeatedly recalled for the same mammographic abnormality before, during and after the transition from screen-film to full-field digital screening mammography. / van Bommel, Rob; Voogd, Adri C.; Louwman, Marieke W. et al.

In: European Radiology, Vol. 27, No. 2, 02.2017, p. 553-561.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Screening outcome in women repeatedly recalled for the same mammographic abnormality before, during and after the transition from screen-film to full-field digital screening mammography

AU - van Bommel, Rob

AU - Voogd, Adri C.

AU - Louwman, Marieke W.

AU - Strobbe, Luc J.

AU - Venderink, Dick

AU - Duijm, Lucien E. M.

PY - 2017/2

Y1 - 2017/2

N2 - The aim of this study was to retrospectively determine screening outcome in women recalled twice for the same mammographic lesion before, during, and after transition from screen-film (SFM) to full-field digital screening mammography (FFDM).We included women with a repeated recall for the same mammographic abnormality (37 at subsequent SFM-screening, obtained between January 2000-April 2010; respectively 54 and 65 women with a prior SFM-screen or FFDM-screen followed by subsequent FFDM-screening, obtained between May 2009-July 2013).At SFM-screening, repeated recalls for the same lesion comprised 1.2 % of recalls (37/3217), including 13 malignancies (positive predictive value (PPV), 35.1 %). During the SFM to FFDM transition (SFM-screen followed by FFDM-screen), FFDM recalls comprised more repeated recalls for the same lesion (2.2 %, P = 0.002), with a lower PPV (14.8 %, P = 0.02). This proportion increased to 2.8 % after transition to FFDM (i.e., two successive FFDM-screens), with 16 malignancies (PPV, 24.6 %). Invasive cancers at repeated recall were smaller than interval cancers (T1a-c, 79.4 versus 46.8 %, P = 0.001), with less lymph node involvement (20.6 versus 46.5 %, P = 0.007).More women are repeatedly recalled for the same mammographic abnormality during and after the transition from SFM to FFDM-screening, with comparable cancer risks before and after the transition. These cancers show better prognostic characteristics than interval cancers.aEuro cent FFDM-screening increases the number of repeated recalls for the same mammographic abnormality.aEuro cent The PPV of these recalls is comparable before and after transition to FFDM-screening.aEuro cent Cancers diagnosed after a repeated recall are smaller than interval cancers.aEuro cent These cancers also show less lymph node involvement than interval cancers.

AB - The aim of this study was to retrospectively determine screening outcome in women recalled twice for the same mammographic lesion before, during, and after transition from screen-film (SFM) to full-field digital screening mammography (FFDM).We included women with a repeated recall for the same mammographic abnormality (37 at subsequent SFM-screening, obtained between January 2000-April 2010; respectively 54 and 65 women with a prior SFM-screen or FFDM-screen followed by subsequent FFDM-screening, obtained between May 2009-July 2013).At SFM-screening, repeated recalls for the same lesion comprised 1.2 % of recalls (37/3217), including 13 malignancies (positive predictive value (PPV), 35.1 %). During the SFM to FFDM transition (SFM-screen followed by FFDM-screen), FFDM recalls comprised more repeated recalls for the same lesion (2.2 %, P = 0.002), with a lower PPV (14.8 %, P = 0.02). This proportion increased to 2.8 % after transition to FFDM (i.e., two successive FFDM-screens), with 16 malignancies (PPV, 24.6 %). Invasive cancers at repeated recall were smaller than interval cancers (T1a-c, 79.4 versus 46.8 %, P = 0.001), with less lymph node involvement (20.6 versus 46.5 %, P = 0.007).More women are repeatedly recalled for the same mammographic abnormality during and after the transition from SFM to FFDM-screening, with comparable cancer risks before and after the transition. These cancers show better prognostic characteristics than interval cancers.aEuro cent FFDM-screening increases the number of repeated recalls for the same mammographic abnormality.aEuro cent The PPV of these recalls is comparable before and after transition to FFDM-screening.aEuro cent Cancers diagnosed after a repeated recall are smaller than interval cancers.aEuro cent These cancers also show less lymph node involvement than interval cancers.

KW - Breast cancer

KW - Mass screening

KW - Mammography

KW - Referral and consultation

KW - Early detection of cancer

KW - INTERVAL BREAST CANCERS

KW - MISSED INTERVAL

KW - RE-ATTENDANCE

KW - PROGRAM

KW - NETHERLANDS

KW - SURVIVAL

KW - PERFORMANCE

KW - SURGERY

KW - IMPACT

KW - STAGE

U2 - 10.1007/s00330-016-4399-y

DO - 10.1007/s00330-016-4399-y

M3 - Article

C2 - 27180183

VL - 27

SP - 553

EP - 561

JO - European Radiology

JF - European Radiology

SN - 0938-7994

IS - 2

ER -