Search

Purpose: To analyse digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) reading times in the screening setting, compared to 2D full-field digital mammography (FFDM), and investigate the impact of reader experience and professional group on interpretation times., Method: Reading time data were recorded in the PROSPECTS Trial, a prospective randomised trial comparing DBT plus FFDM or synthetic 2D mammography (S2D) to FFDM alone, in the National Health Service (NHS) breast screening programme, from January 2019-February 2023. Time to read DBT+FFDM or DBT+S2D and FFDM alone was calculated per case and reading times were compared between modalities using dependent T-tests. Reading times were compared between readers from different professional groups (radiologists and radiographer readers) and experience levels using independent T-tests. The learning curve effect of using DBT in screening on reading time was investigated using a Kruskal-Wallis test., Results: Forty-eight readers interpreted 1,242 FFDM batches (34,210 FFDM cases) and 973 DBT batches (13,983 DBT cases). DBT reading time was doubled compared to FFDM (2.09 ± 0.64 min vs. 0.98 ± 0.30 min; p < 0.001), and DBT+S2D reading was longer than DBT + FFDM (2.24 ± 0.62 min vs. 2.04 ± 0.46 min; p = 0.006). No difference was identified in reading time between radiologists and radiographers (2.06 ± 0.71 min vs. 2.14 ± 0.46 min, respectively; p = 0.71). Readers with five or more years of experience reading DBT were quicker than those with less experience (1.86 ± 0.56 min vs. 2.37 ± 0.65 min; p = 0.008), and DBT reading time decreased after less than 9 months accrued screening experience (p = 0.01)., Conclusions: DBT reading times were double those of FFDM in the screening setting, but there was a short learning curve effect with readers showing significant improvements in reading times within the first nine months of DBT experience., Clinicaltrials: gov Identifier: NCT03733106., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Image-based prediction models for disease detection are sensitive to changes in data acquisition such as the replacement of scanner hardware or updates to the image processing software. The resulting differences in image characteristics may lead to drifts in clinically relevant performance metrics which could cause harm in clinical decision making, even for models that generalise in terms of area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve. We propose Unsupervised Prediction Alignment, a generic automatic recalibration method that requires no ground truth annotations and only limited amounts of unlabelled example images from the shifted data distribution. We illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed method to detect and correct performance drift in mammography-based breast cancer screening and on publicly available histopathology data. We show that the proposed method can preserve the expected performance in terms of sensitivity/specificity under various realistic scenarios of image acquisition shift, thus offering an important safeguard for clinical deployment., (© 2023. Springer Nature Limited.)

Objectives: The interpretation of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) screening examinations is a complex task for an already overstretched workforce which has the potential to increase pressure on readers leading to fatigue and patient safety issues. Studies in non-medical and medical settings have suggested that changes in blink characteristics can reflect fatigue. The purpose of this study is to investigate the use of blink characteristics as an objective marker of fatigue in readers interpreting DBT breast screening examinations., Methods: Twenty-six DBT readers involved in the UK PROSPECTS trial interpreted a test set of 40 DBT cases while being observed by an eye tracking device from November 2019 to February 2021. Raw data from the eye tracker were collected and automated processing software was used to produce eye blinking characteristics data which were analysed using multiple linear regression statistical models., Results: Of the 26 DBT readers recruited, eye tracking data from 23 participants were analysed due to missing data rendering 3 participants' data uninterpretable. The mean reading time per DBT case was 2.81 min. There was a statistically significant increase in blinking duration of 0.38 ms/case as the reading session progressed ( p < 0.0001). This was the result of a significant decrease in the number of ultra-short blinks lasting ≤50 ms ( p = 0.0005) and a significant increase in longer blinks lasting 51-100 ms ( p = 0.008)., Conclusion: Changes in blinking characteristics could serve as objective measures of reader fatigue and may prove useful in the development of DBT reading protocols., Advances in Knowledge: Blink characteristics can be used as an objective measure of fatigue; however there is limited evidence of their use in radiological settings. Our study suggests that changes in blink duration and frequency could be used to monitor fatigue in DBT reading sessions.

Background Double reading can be used in screening mammography, but it is labor intensive. There is limited evidence on whether trained radiographers (ie, technologists) may be used to provide double reading. Purpose To compare the performance of radiologists and radiographers double reading screening mammograms, considering reader experience level. Materials and Methods In this retrospective study, performance and experience data were obtained for radiologists and radiographer readers of all screening mammograms in England from April 2015 to March 2016. Cancer detection rate (CDR), recall rate (RR), and positive predictive value (PPV) of recall based on biopsy-proven findings were calculated for first readers. Performance metrics were analyzed according to reader professional group and years of reading experience using the analysis of variance test. P values less than .05 were considered to indicate statistically significant difference. Results During the study period, 401 readers (224 radiologists and 177 radiographers) double read 1 404 395 screening digital mammograms. There was no difference in CDR between radiologist and radiographer readers (mean, 7.84 vs 7.53 per 1000 examinations, respectively; P = .08) and no difference for readers with more than 10 years of experience compared with 5 years or fewer years of experience, regardless of professional group (mean, 7.75 vs 7.71 per 1000 examinations respectively, P = .87). No difference in the mean RR was observed between radiologists and radiographer readers (5.0% vs 5.2%, respectively, P = .63). A lower RR was seen for readers with more than 10 years of experience compared with 5 years or fewer, regardless of professional group (mean, 4.8% vs 5.8%, respectively; P = .001). No variation in PPV was observed between them ( P = .42), with PPV values of 17.1% for radiologists versus 16.1% for radiographers. A higher PPV was seen for readers with more than 10 years of experience compared with 5 years or less, regardless of professional group (mean, 17.5% and 14.9%, respectively; P = .02). Conclusion No difference in performance was observed between radiographers and radiologists reading screening mammograms in a program that used double reading. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Hooley and Durand in this issue.

Objective: Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) breast biopsy has been recently introduced into clinical practice. This short communication describes the technique and potential as an alternative to MRI-guided biopsy., Methods and Materials: An additional abnormality was detected on a breast MRI examination in a patient with lobular carcinoma. The lesion was occult on conventional mammography, tomosynthesis and ultrasound and required histological diagnosis. Traditionally, this would have necessitated an MRI-guided breast biopsy, but was performed under CESM guidance., Results: A diagnostic CESM study was performed to ensure the lesion visibility with CESM and then targeted under CESM guidance. A limited diagnostic study, CESM scout and paired images for stereotactic targeting were obtained within a 10 min window following a single injection of iodinated contrast agent. The time from positioning in the biopsy device to releasing compression after biopsy and marker clip placement was 15 min. The biopsy confirmed the presence of multifocal breast cancer., Conclusion: CESM-guided breast biopsy is a new technique that can be successfully used as an alternative to MRI-guided breast biopsy., Advances in Knowledge: CESM-guided biopsy can be used to sample breast lesions which remain occult on standard mammography and ultrasound.

Background: Researchers and developers are evaluating the use of mammogram readers that use artificial intelligence (AI) in clinical settings., Objectives: This study examines the attitudes of women, both current and future users of breast screening, towards the use of AI in mammogram reading., Methods: We used a cross-sectional, mixed methods study design with data from the survey responses and focus groups. We researched in four National Health Service hospitals in England. There we approached female workers over the age of 18 years and their immediate friends and family. We collected 4096 responses., Results: Through descriptive statistical analysis, we learnt that women of screening age (≥50 years) were less likely than women under screening age to use technology apps for healthcare advice (likelihood ratio=0.85, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.89, p<0.001). They were also less likely than women under screening age to agree that AI can have a positive effect on society (likelihood ratio=0.89, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.95, p<0.001). However, they were more likely to feel positive about AI used to read mammograms (likelihood ratio=1.09, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.17, p=0.009)., Discussion and Conclusions: Women of screening age are ready to accept the use of AI in breast screening but are less likely to use other AI-based health applications. A large number of women are undecided, or had mixed views, about the use of AI generally and they remain to be convinced that it can be trusted., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: To compare an individual's Personal Performance in Mammographic Screening (PERFORMS) score with their Breast Screening Information System (BSIS) real-life performance data and determine which parameters in the PERFORMS scheme offer the best reflection of BSIS real-life performance metrics., Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, the BSIS real-life performance metrics of individual readers ( n = 452) in the National Health Service Breast Screening Program (NHSBSP) in England were compared with performance in the test set-based assessment scheme over a 3-year period from 2013 to 2016. Cancer detection rate (CDR), recall rate, and positive predictive value (PPV) were calculated for each reader, for both real-life screening and the PERFORMS test. For each metric, real-life and test set versions were compared using a Pearson correlation. The real-life CDR, recall rate, and PPV of outliers were compared against other readers (nonoutliers) using analysis of variance., Results: BSIS real-life CDRs, recall rates, and PPVs showed positive correlations with the equivalent PERFORMS measures ( P < .001, P = .002, and P < .001, respectively). The mean real-life CDR of PERFORMS outliers was 7.2 per 1000 women screened and was significantly lower than other readers (nonoutliers) where the real-life CDR was 7.9 ( P = .002). The mean real-life screening PPV of PERFORMS outliers was 0.14% and was significantly lower than the nonoutlier group who had a mean PPV of 0.17% ( P = .006)., Conclusion: The use of test set-based assessment schemes in a breast screening program has the potential to predict and identify poor performance in real life.© RSNA, 2020 Keywords: Breast, ScreeningSee also the commentary by Thigpen and Rapelyea in this issue., (2020 by the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.)

Objective: To compare the accuracy of standard supplementary views and GE digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) for assessment of soft-tissue mammographic abnormalities., Methods: Women recalled for further assessment of soft-tissue abnormalities were recruited and received standard supplementary views (typically spot compression views) and two-view GE DBT. The added value of DBT in the assessment process was determined by analysing data collected prospectively by radiologists working up the cases. Following anonymization of cases, there was also a retrospective multireader review. The readers first read bilateral standard two-view digital mammography (DM) together with the supplementary mammographic views and gave a combined score for suspicion of malignancy on a five-point scale. The same readers then read bilateral standard two-view DM together with two-view DBT. Pathology data were obtained. Differences were assessed using receiver operating characteristic analysis., Results: The study population was 342 lesions in 322 patients. The final diagnosis was malignant in 113 cases (33%) and benign/normal in 229 cases (67%). In the prospective analysis, the performance of two-view DM plus DBT was at least equivalent to the performance of two-view DM and standard mammographic supplementary views-the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.946 and 0.922, respectively, which did not reach statistical significance. Similar results were obtained for the retrospective review-AUC was 0.900 (DBT) and 0.873 (supplementary views), which did not reach statistical significance., Conclusion: The accuracy of GE DBT in the assessment of screen detected soft-tissue abnormalities is equivalent to the use of standard supplementary mammographic views., Advances in Knowledge: The vast majority of evidence relating to the use of DBT has been gathered from research using Hologic equipment. This study provides evidence for the use of the commercially available GE DBT system demonstrating that it is at least equivalent to supplementary mammographic views in the assessment of soft-tissue screen-detected abnormalities.

Aims: To establish whether lower resolution, lower cost viewing devices have the potential to deliver mammographic interpretation training., Methods: On three occasions over eight months, fourteen consultant radiologists and reporting radiographers read forty challenging digital mammography screening cases on three different displays: a digital mammography workstation, a standard LCD monitor, and a smartphone. Standard image manipulation software was available for use on all three devices. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) were used to determine the significance of differences in performance between the viewing devices with/without the application of image manipulation software. The effect of reader's experience was also assessed., Results: Performance was significantly higher (p < .05) on the mammography workstation compared to the other two viewing devices. When image manipulation software was applied to images viewed on the standard LCD monitor, performance improved to mirror levels seen on the mammography workstation with no significant difference between the two. Image interpretation on the smartphone was uniformly poor. Film reader experience had no significant effect on performance across all three viewing devices., Conclusion: Lower resolution standard LCD monitors combined with appropriate image manipulation software are capable of displaying mammographic pathology, and are potentially suitable for delivering mammographic interpretation training., Key Points: • This study investigates potential devices for training in mammography interpretation. • Lower resolution standard LCD monitors are potentially suitable for mammographic interpretation training. • The effect of image manipulation tools on mammography workstation viewing is insignificant. • Reader experience had no significant effect on performance in all viewing devices. • Smart phones are not suitable for displaying mammograms.

Purpose: To evaluate the mammographic features of breast cancer that favor lesion detection with single reading and computer-aided detection (CAD) or with double reading., Materials and Methods: The Computer Aided Detection Evaluation Trial II study was approved by the ethics committee, and all participants provided written informed consent. A total of 31,057 women were recruited from three screening centers between September 2006 and August 2007. They were randomly allocated to the double reading group, the single reading with CAD group, or the double reading and single reading with CAD group at a ratio of 1:1:28, respectively. In this study, cancers in the women whose mammograms were read with both single reading with CAD and double reading were retrospectively reviewed. The original mammograms were obtained for each case and reviewed by two of three experienced breast radiologists in consensus. The method of detection was noted. The size and predominant mammographic feature of the cancer were recorded, as was the breast density. CAD marking data were reviewed to determine if the cancer had been correctly marked., Results: A total of 227 cancers were detected in 28,204 women. A total of 170 cases were recalled with both reading regimens. Lesion types were masses (66%), microcalcifications (25%), parenchymal deformities (6%), and asymmetric densities (3%). The ability of the reading regimens to correctly prompt the reader to recall cases varied significantly by lesion type (P < .001). More parenchymal deformities were recalled with double reading, whereas more asymmetric densities were recalled with single reading with CAD. There was no difference in the ability of either reading regimen to prompt the reader to correctly recall masses or microcalcifications. CAD correctly prompted 100% of microcalcifications, 87% of mass lesions, 80% of asymmetric densities, and 50% of parenchymal deformities. CAD correctly marked 93% of spiculated masses compared with 80% of ill-defined masses (P = .054). There was a significant trend for cancers detected with double reading to occur only in women with a denser mammographic background pattern (P = .02). Size had no effect on lesion detection., Conclusion: Readers using either single reading with CAD or double reading need to be aware of the strengths and weaknesses of reading regimens to avoid missing the more challenging cancer cases.

Background: The sensitivity of screening mammography for the detection of small breast cancers is higher when the mammogram is read by two readers rather than by a single reader. We conducted a trial to determine whether the performance of a single reader using a computer-aided detection system would match the performance achieved by two readers., Methods: The trial was designed as an equivalence trial, with matched-pair comparisons between the cancer-detection rates achieved by single reading with computer-aided detection and those achieved by double reading. We randomly assigned 31,057 women undergoing routine screening by film mammography at three centers in England to double reading, single reading with computer-aided detection, or both double reading and single reading with computer-aided detection, at a ratio of 1:1:28. The primary outcome measures were the proportion of cancers detected according to regimen and the recall rates within the group receiving both reading regimens., Results: The proportion of cancers detected was 199 of 227 (87.7%) for double reading and 198 of 227 (87.2%) for single reading with computer-aided detection (P=0.89). The overall recall rates were 3.4% for double reading and 3.9% for single reading with computer-aided detection; the difference between the rates was small but significant (P<0.001). The estimated sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value for single reading with computer-aided detection were 87.2%, 96.9%, and 18.0%, respectively. The corresponding values for double reading were 87.7%, 97.4%, and 21.1%. There were no significant differences between the pathological attributes of tumors detected by single reading with computer-aided detection alone and those of tumors detected by double reading alone., Conclusions: Single reading with computer-aided detection could be an alternative to double reading and could improve the rate of detection of cancer from screening mammograms read by a single reader. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00450359.), (2008 Massachusetts Medical Society)

Objective: The aim of our study was to assess the effect of mammographic parenchymal pattern on patient survival, mammographic features, and pathologic features of breast cancer in a screened population., Materials and Methods: We classified the parenchymal pattern (according to BI-RADS) of 759 screened women who presented with a screening-detected (n = 455) or interval (n = 304) invasive breast cancer. Pathologic details (tumor size, histologic grade, lymph node stage, vascular invasion, and histologic type) and mammographic appearances were recorded. Breast cancer-specific survival was ascertained, with a median follow-up of 9.0 years., Results: An excess of interval cancers was seen in women with dense breasts (p < 0.0001). Screening-detected (but not interval) tumors were significantly smaller in fatty breasts (p = 0.014). Tumor grade, lymph node stage, vascular invasion, and histologic type did not vary significantly with mammographic parenchymal pattern in screening-detected or interval cancers. Screening-detected cancers in fatty breasts were more likely to appear as indistinct (p = 0.003) or spiculated (p = 0.002) masses in contrast to cancers in dense breasts, which more commonly appeared as architectural distortions (p < 0.0001). No significant breast cancer-specific survival difference was seen by mammographic parenchymal pattern for screening-detected cancers (p = 0.75), interval cancers (p = 0.82), or both groups combined (p = 0.12)., Conclusion: The prognosis of screened women presenting with breast cancer is unrelated to dense mammographic parenchymal pattern despite an excess of interval cancers and larger screening-detected tumors in this group. These data support the mammographic screening of women with dense parenchymal patterns.

Objective: The aim of this study was to review the prognostic significance of pathologic and radiologic factors for screening-detected invasive breast cancers of any size., Materials and Methods: The patient group was a consecutive series of 470 screening-detected invasive breast cancers that were diagnosed between 1988 and 1998. Data regarding tumor type, grade, maximum invasive diameter, lymph node status, and the presence or absence of vascular invasion were recorded, as were the mammographic features of the lesion. Survival was ascertained from hospital records and a cancer registry. Differences in survival were assessed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves with a log-rank test for difference. The significance of any correlations was assessed using the chi-square test and the chi-square test for trend. Multivariate analysis used a Cox proportional hazards model., Results: At univariate analysis, large invasive size, the presence of definite vascular invasion, high histologic grade, and nodal involvement were associated with poorer breast-cancer-specific survival. Mammographic spiculation (the presence of either a spiculated mass or distortion) was associated with more prolonged breast-cancer-specific survival. The presence or absence of mammographic comedo calcification did not influence breast-cancer-specific survival. In a Cox multivariate analysis that included those factors significant in univariate analysis, size, grade, nodal stage, and mammographic spiculation maintained their prognostic significance., Conclusion: Mammographic spiculation is an independent, good prognostic factor for screening-detected invasive breast cancer. The mechanism of how mammographic spiculation confers a beneficial prognostic effect is not clear.

Abstract: Radiological investigations of the breast are integral to the assessment of symptomatic breast patients and fundamental to the screening programme. Mammography and ultrasound are the standard imaging modalities, supplemented by magnetic resonance imaging in appropriate situations. Possible pathological findings on mammography include masses, architectural distortion, areas of asymmetry between the right and left breast and microcalcification. Ultrasound is the primary method of imaging the breast in younger women. It provides further information about a clinical or mammographic abnormality and can distinguish between solid, cystic or complex lesions. MRI is used in selected cases, to assist with the diagnosis and local staging of primary or recurrent breast cancer. It is also used to assess implant integrity and to screen for malignancy in high-risk women. Image-guided biopsy enables pre-operative diagnosis in most cases of benign and malignant breast conditions. Larger cores of tissue can be obtained with a vacuum assisted biopsy, which may also be used to excise a biopsy-proven benign lesion. As part of the triple assessment, radiological investigations must be correlated with the clinical examination and with any subsequent histology, to ensure-each member of the team is evaluating the same area of the breast. This enables appropriate reassurance to be given when the findings are normal or benign, and accuracy in the diagnosis and staging of patients with breast cancer. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Purpose: This retrospective study determined whether a test-set based assessment scheme (PERFORMS) used in a national breast screening programme could be used to predict real-life performance by investigating if the number of cancers missed by mammography readers in real-life related to the number of cancers missed in the PERFORMS test-set and whether real-life reading volumes affected performance.Method: Data was obtained from consenting readers in the screening programme in England (NHSBSP) where double reading is standard. The rate of cancers missed by individual first readers but correctly identified by second readers was compared with the number of cancers missed in the PERFORMS test-set over a 3-year period. NHSBSP readers are required to interpret at least 1500 cases per year as a first reader, so results were compared between readers who exceeded this target and those that did not. Parametric and non-parametric correlations were calculated.Results: Amongst the 536 readers, there was a highly significant positive correlation between the real-life and PERFORMS test-set missed cancer metrics (Pearson Correlation = 0.228, n = 536, p < .0001, Spearman's rho = 0.265, n = 536, p < .0001). There was no significant difference in rates of missed cancers between the 452 readers who exceeded the 1500 first read per year target and those who did not (t(94.2) = -1.87, p = .0643, r = 0.19).Conclusions: The use of a test-set based assessment scheme accurately reflects real-life mammography reading performance, indicating that it can be a useful tool in identifying poor reader performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]