It also showed that repeated breast cancer screening with 3D mammography only modestly reduced the likelihood of false-positive results compared with standard 2D digital mammography. Other factors that are more strongly associated with a lower risk of false positives include screening once a year and having low-thickness breasts. Older women are also less likely to get a false-positive result.
“Screening technology did not have the greatest impact on reducing false positives,” said Michael Bissell, an epidemiologist in the UC Davis Department of Public Health Sciences and first co-author of the study. “Findings from our study highlight the importance of patient-provider discussions around personalized health. It is important to consider preferences and factors. the patient’s risk when deciding on the duration and modality of screening.”
False-positive mammograms are common
Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death for women in the United States. Early detection with screening mammography is an important strategy to reduce the risk of end-stage breast cancer and death from the disease.
A false-positive result is a positive screening mammogram assessment that results in more diagnoses but not diagnoses of breast cancer. When abnormalities were detected on the mammogram, the patient was recalled for additional imaging and monitoring tests. If found to be cancer-free at the end of the diagnostic evaluation and for one year after recall, the patient is considered to have received a false-positive result.
“Despite the important benefit of mammograms in reducing breast cancer mortality, it may lead to a significant increase in mortality from breast cancer,” said Diana Miglioretti, professor and chief of the biostatistics division in the UC Davis Department. additional imaging and biopsy procedures, financial and opportunity costs, and patient anxiety. Public Health Scientist, UC Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center researcher and senior author of the study.
False-positive results are common. While about 12% of 2D screening mammograms were recovered for further work, only 4.4% of them, or 0.5% overall, concluded with a cancer diagnosis.
Ms. Thao said: “To detect breast cancer early, we need to be vigilant and investigate any possible abnormalities. Quyen Ho, a radiologist at Ho University Medical Center Chi Minh, Vietnam, a research fellow at UC Davis School of Medicine and the study’s first co-author.
Mammography analysis gave false positive results
Researchers analyzed data collected by the Association for Breast Cancer Surveillance on 3 million screening mammograms for 903,495 women aged 40-79 years. Film screening was carried out from 2005-2018 at 126 radiology facilities.
The study assessed screening modality, screening interval, age, and breast density. It estimates the cumulative risk that a woman will receive at least one false-positive symptom during 10 years of screening every year or every two years (every year). It also assessed the risks of a false positive leading to recommending re-imaging within six months (short follow-up) and, separately, in a biopsy recommendation.
Mammography versus fusion for breast cancer screening
The study found that the probability of getting at least one false-positive recall over a 10-year period was slightly lower with 3D digital mammography compared with 2D. The reduction in false positives with 3D versus 2D mammography was greatest for women with non-thickening breasts and who had annual screenings.
Researchers estimate that during 10 years of annual biosynthetic screening, 50% of women will experience at least one false-positive follow-up, 17% recommend false-positive follow-up over the period. short and 11% suggested a false-positive biopsy. This is compared with 56% of women screened with 2D digital mammograms for false positives, 18% recommending short-term follow-up, and 12% recommending biopsies. .
Regardless of the type of screening, false-positive results were substantially lower for younger older age groups and for women with completely fat versus extra-thick breasts.
Annual breast cancer screening versus every two years
The study also estimated 10-year risk for annual screening versus biennial. This finding was observed for both 3D and 2D mammography.
“We were surprised that the newer 3D technology for breast cancer screening did not significantly reduce the risk of a false-positive result after 10 years of screening; however, the chance of a false positive was much lower with screening for breast cancer. screening repeated every two years versus annually”. Lake.
For short-term follow-up recommendations, 17% of women undergoing annual 3D mammograms are estimated to have at least one false positive over 10 years, compared with only 10% of those screened. biennial. False-positive benign biopsy recommendations are estimated to occur in 11% of women with annual 3D mammograms but only in 7% of those screened every two years.
After 10 years of annual screening, the risk of a false-positive result in 3D was lower than with 2D mammography for all results. For biennial screening, the risk of false-positive recall is lower with 3D mammography. There was no difference in short-term follow-up or biopsy recommendations.