Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Breast

Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in recalls from the Dutch breast cancer screening program: validation of results in a large multireader, multicase study

Authors: U. C. Lalji, I. P. L. Houben, R. Prevos, S. Gommers, M. van Goethem, S. Vanwetswinkel, R. Pijnappel, R. Steeman, C. Frotscher, W. Mok, P. Nelemans, M. L. Smidt, R. G. Beets-Tan, J. E. Wildberger, M. B. I. Lobbes

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 12/2016

Abstract

Objectives

Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) is a promising problem-solving tool in women referred from a breast cancer screening program. We aimed to study the validity of preliminary results of CESM using a larger panel of radiologists with different levels of CESM experience.

Methods

All women referred from the Dutch breast cancer screening program were eligible for CESM. 199 consecutive cases were viewed by ten radiologists. Four had extensive CESM experience, three had no CESM experience but were experienced breast radiologists, and three were residents. All readers provided a BI-RADS score for the low-energy CESM images first, after which the score could be adjusted when viewing the entire CESM exam. BI-RADS 1-3 were considered benign and BI-RADS 4-5 malignant. With this cutoff, we calculated sensitivity, specificity and area under the ROC curve.

Results

CESM increased diagnostic accuracy in all readers. The performance for all readers using CESM was: sensitivity 96.9 % (+3.9 %), specificity 69.7 % (+33.8 %) and area under the ROC curve 0.833 (+0.188).

Conclusion

CESM is superior to conventional mammography, with excellent problem-solving capabilities in women referred from the breast cancer screening program. Previous results were confirmed even in a larger panel of readers with varying CESM experience.

Key Points

• CESM is consistently superior to conventional mammography

• CESM increases diagnostic accuracy regardless of a reader’s experience

• CESM is an excellent problem-solving tool in recalls from screening programs

Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC et al (2003) Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med 138:168–175CrossRefPubMed

Dromain C, Thibault F, Muller S et al (2011) Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results. Eur Radiol 21:565–574CrossRefPubMed

Jochelson MS, Dershaw DD, Sung JS et al (2013) Bilateral contrast-enhanced dual-energy digital mammography: feasibility and comparison with conventional digital mammography and MR imaging in women with known breast carcinoma. Radiology 266:743–751CrossRefPubMed

Luczyńska E, Heinze-Paluchowska S, Dyczek S et al (2014) Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography: comparison with conventional mammography and histopathology in 152 women. Korean J Radiol 15:689–696CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Lobbes MBI, Lalji U, Houwers J et al. (2014) Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in patients referred from the breast cancer screening programme. Eur Radiol 24:1668–76

Stacul F, van der Molen AJ, Reimer P et al (2011) Contrast induced nephropathy: updated ESUR Contrast Media Safety Committee guidelines. Eur Radiol 21:2527–2541CrossRefPubMed

Lobbes MBI, Smidt ML, Houwers J et al (2013) Contrast enhanced mammography: techniques, current results, and potential indications. Clin Radiol 68:935–944CrossRefPubMed

Fallenberg EM, Dromain C, Diekmann F et al (2014) Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography: Does mammography provide additional clinical benefits or can some radiation exposure be avoided? Breast Cancer Res Treat 146:371–381CrossRefPubMed

Francescone MA, Jochelson MS, Dershaw DD et al (2014) Low energy mammogram obtained in contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) is comparable to routine full-field digital mammography (FFDM). Eur J Radiol 83:1350–1355CrossRefPubMed

10.

Lalji UC, Jeukens CRLPN, Houben I et al (2015) Evaluation of low-energy contrast-enhanced spectral mammography images by comparing them to full-field digital mammography using EUREF image quality criteria. Eur Radiol. doi:10.1007/s00330-015-3695-2 PubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Obuchowski NA (2003) Receiver operating characteristic curves and their use in radiology. Radiology 229:3–8CrossRefPubMed

12.

Liston J, Wilson R (2010) NHSBSP clinical guidelines for breast cancer screening assessment, 3rd edn. NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, Sheffield. http://www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/breastscreen/publications/nhsbsp49.pdf. Accessed 1 Mar 2015

13.

Nationaal Borstkanker Overleg Nederland (NABON) National guideline breast cancer 2012, Amsterdam, NABON 2012 (2012) Mammacarcinoom

14.

Genders TSS, Spronk S, Stijnen T et al (2012) Methods for calculating sensitivity and specificity of clustered data: a tutorial. Radiology 265:910–916CrossRefPubMed

15.

Robin X, Turck N, Hainard A et al (2011) pROC: an open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves. BMC Bioinformat 12:77CrossRef

16.

Lalji U, Lobbes M (2014) Contrast-enhanced dual-energy mammography: a promising new imaging tool in breast cancer detection. Womens Health (Lond Engl) 10:289–298CrossRef

17.

Lewin JM, Isaacs PK, Vance V, Larke FJ (2003) Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital subtraction mammography: feasibility. Radiology 229:261–268CrossRefPubMed

18.

Dromain C, Thibault F, Diekmann F et al (2012) Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results of a multireader, multicase study. Breast Cancer Res 14:R94CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Fallenberg EM, Dromain C, Diekmann F et al (2013) Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography versus MRI: initial results in the detection of breast cancer and assessment of tumour size. Eur Radiol. doi:10.1007/s00330-013-3007-7

20.

Cheung Y-C, Lin Y-C, Wan Y-L et al (2014) Diagnostic performance of dual-energy contrast-enhanced subtracted mammography in dense breasts compared to mammography alone: interobserver blind-reading analysis. Eur Radiol. doi:10.1007/s00330-014-3271-1 PubMed

21.

Cheung Y-C, Tsai H-P, Lo Y-F et al (2015) Clinical utility of dual-energy contrast-enhanced spectral mammography for breast microcalcifications without associated mass: a preliminary analysis. Eur Radiol. doi:10.1007/s00330-015-3904-z PubMed

22.

Łuczyńska E, Heinze-Paluchowska S, Hendrick E et al (2015) Comparison between breast MRI and contrast-enhanced spectral mammography. Med Sci Monit 21:1358–1367CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Thibault F, Balleyguier C, Tardivon A, Dromain C (2012) Contrast enhanced spectral mammography: better than MRI? Eur J Radiol 81:S162–S164CrossRefPubMed

24.

Badr S, Laurent N, Régis C et al (2014) Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography in routine clinical practice in 2013. Diagn Interv Imaging 95:245–258CrossRefPubMed

Title: Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in recalls from the Dutch breast cancer screening program: validation of results in a large multireader, multicase study
Authors: U. C. Lalji
I. P. L. Houben
R. Prevos
S. Gommers
M. van Goethem
S. Vanwetswinkel
R. Pijnappel
R. Steeman
C. Frotscher
W. Mok
P. Nelemans
M. L. Smidt
R. G. Beets-Tan
J. E. Wildberger
M. B. I. Lobbes
Publication date: 01-12-2016
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 12/2016
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4336-0

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in recalls from the Dutch breast cancer screening program: validation of results in a large multireader, multicase study

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Key Points

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Key Points

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 12/2016

Region of interest-based versus whole-lung segmentation-based approach for MR lung perfusion quantification in 2-year-old children after congenital diaphragmatic hernia repair

A meta-analysis of diffusion-weighted and gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging for the detection of liver metastases

Submillisievert CT using model-based iterative reconstruction with lung-specific setting: An initial phantom study

Brain parenchymal damage in neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder – A multimodal MRI study

Letter to the Editor: Acute extrahepatic infectious or inflammatory diseases are a cause of transient mosaic pattern on CT and MR imaging related to sinusoidal dilatation of the liver

Over-the-wire versus through-the-scope stents for the palliation of malignant gastric outlet obstruction: A retrospective comparison study