Impact of digital breast tomosynthesis on screening performance and interval cancer rates compared to digital mammography: A meta-analysis.
<h4>Background</h4>The performance of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) alone, digital mammography (DM) plus DBT, and synthesized mammography (SM) plus DBT, in comparison to DM in breast cancer screening, remains a topic of ongoing debate. The effectiveness of these modalities in reduci...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | PLoS ONE |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0315466 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1825206774439870464 |
|---|---|
| author | Xuewen Liu Ting Yang Juan Yao |
| author_facet | Xuewen Liu Ting Yang Juan Yao |
| author_sort | Xuewen Liu |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | <h4>Background</h4>The performance of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) alone, digital mammography (DM) plus DBT, and synthesized mammography (SM) plus DBT, in comparison to DM in breast cancer screening, remains a topic of ongoing debate. The effectiveness of these modalities in reducing interval cancer rates (ICR) is particularly contentious.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>A database of data was searched for articles published until July 2024. Initially, the pooled sensitivity and specificity of DBT (DBT alone, DM/DBT, and SM/DBT) and DM were estimated. Additionally, the sensitivity of breast cancer screening and ICR for DBT alone, DM/DBT, and SM/DBT compared to DM. The characteristics of interval breast cancer were compared with those screening BC, alongside differences across various screening methods.<h4>Results</h4>Eleven studies comparing DBT and DM were included. The sensitivity of DBT was higher than that of DM, with rates of 86% (95%CI: 81, 90) and 80% (95%CI: 76, 84), respectively. The specificities of both modalities were similar, recorded at 96% (95%CI: 95, 98) and 96% (95%CI: 95, 97), respectively. In comparison to DM, the screening sensitivities of DBT, DM/DBT, and SM/DBT were increased by 4.33% (95% CI: 1.52, 7.13), 6.29% (95% CI: 2.55, 10.03), and 5.22% (95% CI: 1.35, 9.10), respectively; however, the difference in the ICR was not statistically significant.<h4>Conclusion</h4>DBT offers advantages in enhancing the sensitivity of breast cancer screening; however, its impact on ICR remains uncertain. Consequently, further research is necessary to comprehensively evaluate both the effectiveness of screening and the potential risks associated with DBT. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-277fd6f3fe2546ac825ee97042d48455 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1932-6203 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-01-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLoS ONE |
| spelling | doaj-art-277fd6f3fe2546ac825ee97042d484552025-02-07T05:30:40ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032025-01-01201e031546610.1371/journal.pone.0315466Impact of digital breast tomosynthesis on screening performance and interval cancer rates compared to digital mammography: A meta-analysis.Xuewen LiuTing YangJuan Yao<h4>Background</h4>The performance of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) alone, digital mammography (DM) plus DBT, and synthesized mammography (SM) plus DBT, in comparison to DM in breast cancer screening, remains a topic of ongoing debate. The effectiveness of these modalities in reducing interval cancer rates (ICR) is particularly contentious.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>A database of data was searched for articles published until July 2024. Initially, the pooled sensitivity and specificity of DBT (DBT alone, DM/DBT, and SM/DBT) and DM were estimated. Additionally, the sensitivity of breast cancer screening and ICR for DBT alone, DM/DBT, and SM/DBT compared to DM. The characteristics of interval breast cancer were compared with those screening BC, alongside differences across various screening methods.<h4>Results</h4>Eleven studies comparing DBT and DM were included. The sensitivity of DBT was higher than that of DM, with rates of 86% (95%CI: 81, 90) and 80% (95%CI: 76, 84), respectively. The specificities of both modalities were similar, recorded at 96% (95%CI: 95, 98) and 96% (95%CI: 95, 97), respectively. In comparison to DM, the screening sensitivities of DBT, DM/DBT, and SM/DBT were increased by 4.33% (95% CI: 1.52, 7.13), 6.29% (95% CI: 2.55, 10.03), and 5.22% (95% CI: 1.35, 9.10), respectively; however, the difference in the ICR was not statistically significant.<h4>Conclusion</h4>DBT offers advantages in enhancing the sensitivity of breast cancer screening; however, its impact on ICR remains uncertain. Consequently, further research is necessary to comprehensively evaluate both the effectiveness of screening and the potential risks associated with DBT.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0315466 |
| spellingShingle | Xuewen Liu Ting Yang Juan Yao Impact of digital breast tomosynthesis on screening performance and interval cancer rates compared to digital mammography: A meta-analysis. PLoS ONE |
| title | Impact of digital breast tomosynthesis on screening performance and interval cancer rates compared to digital mammography: A meta-analysis. |
| title_full | Impact of digital breast tomosynthesis on screening performance and interval cancer rates compared to digital mammography: A meta-analysis. |
| title_fullStr | Impact of digital breast tomosynthesis on screening performance and interval cancer rates compared to digital mammography: A meta-analysis. |
| title_full_unstemmed | Impact of digital breast tomosynthesis on screening performance and interval cancer rates compared to digital mammography: A meta-analysis. |
| title_short | Impact of digital breast tomosynthesis on screening performance and interval cancer rates compared to digital mammography: A meta-analysis. |
| title_sort | impact of digital breast tomosynthesis on screening performance and interval cancer rates compared to digital mammography a meta analysis |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0315466 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT xuewenliu impactofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisonscreeningperformanceandintervalcancerratescomparedtodigitalmammographyametaanalysis AT tingyang impactofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisonscreeningperformanceandintervalcancerratescomparedtodigitalmammographyametaanalysis AT juanyao impactofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisonscreeningperformanceandintervalcancerratescomparedtodigitalmammographyametaanalysis |