Interval breast cancers in the 'screening with tomosynthesis or standard mammography' (STORM) population-based trial

Nehmat Houssami, Daniela Bernardi, Francesca Caumo, Silvia Brunelli, Carmine Fantò, Marvi Valentini, Giovanna Romanucci, Maria A Gentilini, Manuel Zorzi, Petra Macaskill

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

BACKGROUND & METHODS: The prospective 'screening with tomosynthesis or standard mammography' (STORM) trial recruited women participating in biennial breast screening in Italy (2011-2012), and compared sequential screen-readings based on 2D-mammography alone or based on tomosynthesis (integrated 2D/3D-mammography). The STORM trial showed that tomosynthesis screen-reading significantly increased breast cancer detection compared to 2D-mammography alone. The present study completes reporting of the trial by examining interval breast cancers ascertained at two year follow-up.

RESULTS: 9 interval breast cancers were identified; the estimated interval cancer rate was 1.23/1000 screens [9/7292] (95%CI 0.56 to 2.34) or 1.24/1000 negative screens [9/7235] (95%CI 0.57 to 2.36). In concurrently screened women who attended the same screening services and received 2D-mammography, interval cancer rate was 1.60/1000 screens [40/25,058] (95% CI 1.14 to 2.17) or 1.61/1000 negative screens [40/24,922] (95% CI 1.15 to 2.18). Estimated screening sensitivity for the STORM trial was 85.5% [59/69] (95%CI 75.0%-92.8%), and that for 2D-mammography screening was 77.3% [136/176] (95%CI 70.4%-83.2%).

CONCLUSION: Interval breast cancer rate amongst screening participants in the STORM trial was marginally lower (and screening sensitivity higher) than estimates amongst 2D-screened women; these findings should be interpreted with caution given the small number of interval cases and the sample size of the trial. Much larger screening studies, or pooled analyses, are required to examine interval cancer rates arising after breast tomosynthesis screening versus digital mammography screening.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)150-153
Number of pages4
JournalBreast
Volume38
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2018

Fingerprint

Mammography
Early Detection of Cancer
Breast Neoplasms
Population
Reading
Breast
Neoplasms
Sample Size
Italy

Keywords

  • Aged
  • Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging
  • Early Detection of Cancer/methods
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Imaging, Three-Dimensional/methods
  • Italy/epidemiology
  • Mammography/methods
  • Mass Screening/methods
  • Middle Aged
  • Prospective Studies
  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • Time Factors

Cite this

Interval breast cancers in the 'screening with tomosynthesis or standard mammography' (STORM) population-based trial. / Houssami, Nehmat; Bernardi, Daniela; Caumo, Francesca; Brunelli, Silvia; Fantò, Carmine; Valentini, Marvi; Romanucci, Giovanna; Gentilini, Maria A; Zorzi, Manuel; Macaskill, Petra.

In: Breast, Vol. 38, 04.2018, p. 150-153.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Houssami, N, Bernardi, D, Caumo, F, Brunelli, S, Fantò, C, Valentini, M, Romanucci, G, Gentilini, MA, Zorzi, M & Macaskill, P 2018, 'Interval breast cancers in the 'screening with tomosynthesis or standard mammography' (STORM) population-based trial', Breast, vol. 38, pp. 150-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2018.01.002
Houssami, Nehmat ; Bernardi, Daniela ; Caumo, Francesca ; Brunelli, Silvia ; Fantò, Carmine ; Valentini, Marvi ; Romanucci, Giovanna ; Gentilini, Maria A ; Zorzi, Manuel ; Macaskill, Petra. / Interval breast cancers in the 'screening with tomosynthesis or standard mammography' (STORM) population-based trial. In: Breast. 2018 ; Vol. 38. pp. 150-153.
@article{921a63f413394e379a19f95574bacaaa,
title = "Interval breast cancers in the 'screening with tomosynthesis or standard mammography' (STORM) population-based trial",
abstract = "BACKGROUND & METHODS: The prospective 'screening with tomosynthesis or standard mammography' (STORM) trial recruited women participating in biennial breast screening in Italy (2011-2012), and compared sequential screen-readings based on 2D-mammography alone or based on tomosynthesis (integrated 2D/3D-mammography). The STORM trial showed that tomosynthesis screen-reading significantly increased breast cancer detection compared to 2D-mammography alone. The present study completes reporting of the trial by examining interval breast cancers ascertained at two year follow-up.RESULTS: 9 interval breast cancers were identified; the estimated interval cancer rate was 1.23/1000 screens [9/7292] (95{\%}CI 0.56 to 2.34) or 1.24/1000 negative screens [9/7235] (95{\%}CI 0.57 to 2.36). In concurrently screened women who attended the same screening services and received 2D-mammography, interval cancer rate was 1.60/1000 screens [40/25,058] (95{\%} CI 1.14 to 2.17) or 1.61/1000 negative screens [40/24,922] (95{\%} CI 1.15 to 2.18). Estimated screening sensitivity for the STORM trial was 85.5{\%} [59/69] (95{\%}CI 75.0{\%}-92.8{\%}), and that for 2D-mammography screening was 77.3{\%} [136/176] (95{\%}CI 70.4{\%}-83.2{\%}).CONCLUSION: Interval breast cancer rate amongst screening participants in the STORM trial was marginally lower (and screening sensitivity higher) than estimates amongst 2D-screened women; these findings should be interpreted with caution given the small number of interval cases and the sample size of the trial. Much larger screening studies, or pooled analyses, are required to examine interval cancer rates arising after breast tomosynthesis screening versus digital mammography screening.",
keywords = "Aged, Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging, Early Detection of Cancer/methods, Female, Humans, Imaging, Three-Dimensional/methods, Italy/epidemiology, Mammography/methods, Mass Screening/methods, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Sensitivity and Specificity, Time Factors",
author = "Nehmat Houssami and Daniela Bernardi and Francesca Caumo and Silvia Brunelli and Carmine Fant{\`o} and Marvi Valentini and Giovanna Romanucci and Gentilini, {Maria A} and Manuel Zorzi and Petra Macaskill",
note = "Copyright {\circledC} 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.",
year = "2018",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1016/j.breast.2018.01.002",
language = "English",
volume = "38",
pages = "150--153",
journal = "Breast",
issn = "0960-9776",
publisher = "Churchill Livingstone",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Interval breast cancers in the 'screening with tomosynthesis or standard mammography' (STORM) population-based trial

AU - Houssami, Nehmat

AU - Bernardi, Daniela

AU - Caumo, Francesca

AU - Brunelli, Silvia

AU - Fantò, Carmine

AU - Valentini, Marvi

AU - Romanucci, Giovanna

AU - Gentilini, Maria A

AU - Zorzi, Manuel

AU - Macaskill, Petra

N1 - Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

PY - 2018/4

Y1 - 2018/4

N2 - BACKGROUND & METHODS: The prospective 'screening with tomosynthesis or standard mammography' (STORM) trial recruited women participating in biennial breast screening in Italy (2011-2012), and compared sequential screen-readings based on 2D-mammography alone or based on tomosynthesis (integrated 2D/3D-mammography). The STORM trial showed that tomosynthesis screen-reading significantly increased breast cancer detection compared to 2D-mammography alone. The present study completes reporting of the trial by examining interval breast cancers ascertained at two year follow-up.RESULTS: 9 interval breast cancers were identified; the estimated interval cancer rate was 1.23/1000 screens [9/7292] (95%CI 0.56 to 2.34) or 1.24/1000 negative screens [9/7235] (95%CI 0.57 to 2.36). In concurrently screened women who attended the same screening services and received 2D-mammography, interval cancer rate was 1.60/1000 screens [40/25,058] (95% CI 1.14 to 2.17) or 1.61/1000 negative screens [40/24,922] (95% CI 1.15 to 2.18). Estimated screening sensitivity for the STORM trial was 85.5% [59/69] (95%CI 75.0%-92.8%), and that for 2D-mammography screening was 77.3% [136/176] (95%CI 70.4%-83.2%).CONCLUSION: Interval breast cancer rate amongst screening participants in the STORM trial was marginally lower (and screening sensitivity higher) than estimates amongst 2D-screened women; these findings should be interpreted with caution given the small number of interval cases and the sample size of the trial. Much larger screening studies, or pooled analyses, are required to examine interval cancer rates arising after breast tomosynthesis screening versus digital mammography screening.

AB - BACKGROUND & METHODS: The prospective 'screening with tomosynthesis or standard mammography' (STORM) trial recruited women participating in biennial breast screening in Italy (2011-2012), and compared sequential screen-readings based on 2D-mammography alone or based on tomosynthesis (integrated 2D/3D-mammography). The STORM trial showed that tomosynthesis screen-reading significantly increased breast cancer detection compared to 2D-mammography alone. The present study completes reporting of the trial by examining interval breast cancers ascertained at two year follow-up.RESULTS: 9 interval breast cancers were identified; the estimated interval cancer rate was 1.23/1000 screens [9/7292] (95%CI 0.56 to 2.34) or 1.24/1000 negative screens [9/7235] (95%CI 0.57 to 2.36). In concurrently screened women who attended the same screening services and received 2D-mammography, interval cancer rate was 1.60/1000 screens [40/25,058] (95% CI 1.14 to 2.17) or 1.61/1000 negative screens [40/24,922] (95% CI 1.15 to 2.18). Estimated screening sensitivity for the STORM trial was 85.5% [59/69] (95%CI 75.0%-92.8%), and that for 2D-mammography screening was 77.3% [136/176] (95%CI 70.4%-83.2%).CONCLUSION: Interval breast cancer rate amongst screening participants in the STORM trial was marginally lower (and screening sensitivity higher) than estimates amongst 2D-screened women; these findings should be interpreted with caution given the small number of interval cases and the sample size of the trial. Much larger screening studies, or pooled analyses, are required to examine interval cancer rates arising after breast tomosynthesis screening versus digital mammography screening.

KW - Aged

KW - Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging

KW - Early Detection of Cancer/methods

KW - Female

KW - Humans

KW - Imaging, Three-Dimensional/methods

KW - Italy/epidemiology

KW - Mammography/methods

KW - Mass Screening/methods

KW - Middle Aged

KW - Prospective Studies

KW - Sensitivity and Specificity

KW - Time Factors

U2 - 10.1016/j.breast.2018.01.002

DO - 10.1016/j.breast.2018.01.002

M3 - Article

VL - 38

SP - 150

EP - 153

JO - Breast

JF - Breast

SN - 0960-9776

ER -