Breast Cancer Yield for Screening Mammographic Examinations with Recommendation for Short-Interval Follow-up
- 1 March 2005
- journal article
- Published by Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) in Radiology
- Vol. 234 (3), 684-692
- https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2343031976
Abstract
To compare cancer yield for screening examinations with recommendation for short-interval follow-up after diagnostic imaging work-up versus after screening mammography only.From January 1996 to December 1999, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System assessments and recommendations were collected prospectively for 1,171,792 screening examinations in 758,015 women aged 40-89 years at seven mammography registries in Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Registries obtained waiver of signed consent or collected signed consent in accordance with institutional review boards at each location. Diagnosis of invasive cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ within 24 months of screening examination and tumor stage and size for invasive cancer were determined through linkage to pathology database or tumor registry. chi2 test was used to determine significant differences between groups.Overall, 5.2% of first and 1.7% of subsequent screens included recommendation for short-interval follow-up, which was similar to likelihood of recommendation for diagnostic evaluation (first screens, 4.6%; subsequent, 2.6%). Most recommendations for short-interval follow-up were based on screening mammography alone (86.2% of first screens, 77.5% of subsequent). Yield of cancer for screening examinations with probably benign finding (PBF) and recommendation for short-interval follow-up based on screening mammography alone tended to be lower than in those with PBF and recommendation for short-interval follow-up after additional work-up (first screens: 0.54% vs 0.96%, P=.10; subsequent: 1.50% vs 1.73%, P=.26). Proportion of stage II and higher disease tended to be higher for examinations with PBF and recommendation for short-interval follow-up based on screening mammography alone compared with those recommended for short-interval follow-up after additional work-up (first screens: 34.7% vs 24.4%, P=.43; subsequent: 27.5% vs 19.2%, P=.13).Many first screening examinations include recommendation for short-interval follow-up based on screening mammography alone. Cancer yield for these examinations is low and is lower than that with diagnostic work-up prior to short-interval follow-up recommendation. Absence of diagnostic work-up prior to short-interval follow-up recommendation may result in periodic surveillance of a high proportion of benign lesions.Keywords
This publication has 22 references indexed in Scilit:
- Differential Value of Comparison with Previous Examinations in Diagnostic Versus Screening MammographyAmerican Journal of Roentgenology, 2002
- Revisiting the Mammographic Follow-Up of BI-RADS Category 3 LesionsAmerican Journal of Roentgenology, 2002
- Association of Recall Rates with Sensitivity and Positive Predictive Values of Screening MammographyAmerican Journal of Roentgenology, 2001
- Short-term Follow-up Results in 795 Nonpalpable Probably Benign Lesions Detected at Screening MammographyRadiology, 2001
- Follow-up of Probably Benign Breast LesionsRadiology, 2000
- Six-month Follow-up: An Alternative ViewRadiology, 1999
- Probably Benign Breast Lesions: When Should Follow-up Be Recommended and What Is the Optimal Follow-up Protocol?Radiology, 1999
- Coding mammograms using the classification "probably benign finding--short interval follow-up suggested".American Journal of Roentgenology, 1999
- False Positive Rate of Screening MammographyNew England Journal of Medicine, 1998
- Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium: a national mammography screening and outcomes database.American Journal of Roentgenology, 1997