Screening Outcomes Better for Women Undergoing Digital Breast Tomosynthesis

Lower recall rate, higher cancer detection rate, positive predictive value of recall seen for digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography

breast scan images
Adobe Stock

WEDNESDAY, March 29, 2023 (HealthDay News) -- Screening mammography outcomes are better for women undergoing digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) versus digital mammography (DM), according to a study published online March 14 in Radiology.

Emily F. Conant, M.D., from the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, and colleagues conducted a retrospective cohort study involving women aged 40 to 79 years who underwent DM or DBT screening mammograms between January 2014 and December 2020. Data were included for 2,528,063 screening mammograms from 1,100,447 women.

The researchers found that compared with DM, DBT screening mammograms had lower recall rates (8.9 versus 10.3 percent), higher cancer detection rates (5.3 versus 4.5 per 1,000 screening mammograms), higher positive predictive value of recall (5.9 versus 4.3 percent), and higher biopsy rates (17.6 versus 14.5 per 1,000 screening mammograms) in crude analyses. The positive predictive value of biopsy was similar between the groups (29.3 and 30.0 percent for DBT and DM, respectively). The associations remained stable with respect to statistical significance after adjustment for age, breast density, site, and index year.

"We showed that the most important mammographic screening outcomes, increased cancer detection combined with fewer false positives, were significantly improved when women were screened with digital breast tomosynthesis compared to 2D digital mammography alone," Conant said in a statement. "Therefore, women should seek out sites that routinely offer breast cancer screening with DBT."

Several authors disclosed financial ties to the medical technology industry.

Abstract/Full Text

Editorial (subscription or payment may be required)

Elana Gotkine

Elana Gotkine

Medically reviewed by Mark Arredondo, M.D.

Published on March 29, 2023

Read this Next
About UsOur ProductsCustom SolutionsHow it’s SoldOur ResultsDeliveryContact UsBlogPrivacy PolicyFAQ