Mammographic film density and detection of small breast cancers

Young, Kenneth C.; Wallis, MG; Ramsdale, M.L.

doi:10.1016/s0009-9260(05)81741-6

Cited by 84 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…10 Recently they have suggested a higher target film density, which, with the same power (kV), will result in higher doses to the breast. 34 These reported values for doses are in the range of those we assumed in this study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 50%

Radiation risk of mammography related to benefit in screening programmes: a favourable balance?

et al. 1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 50%

Radiation risk of mammography related to benefit in screening programmes: a favourable balance?

et al. 1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…10 Secondly, the film density has been optimised at 1.4 D to 1.8 D, again on the basis of published research. 11 Thirdly, quality assurance teams have investigated individual programmes with low detection rates, often resulting in major improvements in sensitivity. Fourthly, the skill base necessary to achieve a consistent high performance has been realised over the first decade of screening.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Results from the UK NHS breast screening programme 1994–1999

Blanks

Moss

Patnick³

2000

J Med Screen

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective-To present results from the NHS breast screening programme (NHS-BSP) from 1994 through to 1999 and to examine the extent to which interim targets are being achieved. Methods-Data were collated from all screening programmes in the UK on standard statistical returns. Performance of the screening programme was evaluated using calculated targets based on comparison with the Swedish two counties (STC) randomised controlled trial. Results-In the early years of screening (1988-1993), the NHS programme was detecting more DCIS but considerably less invasive cancers than expected, based on the STC trial. Since the screening year 1993/94 (1 April to 31 March) the standardised detection ratio (SDR) measure of the detection of invasive cancers has increased by 36% from 0.83 to 1.13. The SDR has been greater than 1 since 1996/97 suggesting that the NHSBSP has only been screening as eYciently as the STC trial since this date. Uptake for screening has been relatively stable over time at approximately 75%. Conclusions-The NHSBSP has made considerable advances in performance since its inception in 1988 and screening uptake and age standardised invasive cancer detection rates are (by 1999) well in excess of targets. The early years of screening were characterised by good uptake but a low sensitivity for the detection of invasive cancers. It is anticipated that the screening programme will have an increasing impact on breast cancer mortality, particularly in the 55-69 year age group over the coming years.

show abstract

“…In the breast screening programme, film quality and film density aVect screening sensitivity. 3 Also, four categories of error contribute to the presentation of interval cancers: poor radiographic technique; absence of radiographic criteria of cancer; misinterpretation of subtle radiographic signs, and obvious oversight on the part of the screening radiologist. 4 When interval cancer rates are high, the eVectiveness of a screening programme is compromised.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiological peer review of interval cancers in the East Anglian breast screening programme: what are we missing?

et al. 2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective-To determine whether association between classification of interval cancers (false negative, minimal sign, true interval, occult) and tumour characteristics can indicate areas for improvement in eVectiveness of screening . Setting-East Anglian regional Breast Screening Programme. Method-The consensus classification of interval cases, obtained through peer review, was compared with tumour characteristics: size; grade; and nodal status, and with radiological signs. A set of 923 cancers with known tumour characteristics, presenting in unscreened women, was available for comparison. Result-In total, 385 interval cases were analysed. Prognosis of interval cancers was at least as good as that of cancers in unscreened women, with fewer node positive cases. No significant relation was found between classification of cases and age of patients. True intervals tended to present later after a negative screen, although false negatives commonly presented earlier. Occult cancers were significantly smaller than false negatives. Analysis of histological type yielded little of relevance, and mammographic appearance was similar in all classifications. At diagnosis, cancers in the low risk group were more likely to be seen as spiculate masses, whereas high risk cases more often appeared as opacities. A higher proportion of interval cases had been assessed than in the normal screened population. Conclusion-Sensitivity may be improved by reducing false negative and minimal sign cases (21% of interval cancers in East Anglia). These will include tumours in all risk groups, and with all radiological features, thus no particular age group or radiological feature may be targeted for improvement. Misdiagnosis at assessment reduces sensitivity and therefore merits particular study. (J Med Screen 2001;8:77-85)

show abstract

Mammographic film density and detection of small breast cancers

Cited by 84 publications

References 3 publications

Radiation risk of mammography related to benefit in screening programmes: a favourable balance?

Radiation risk of mammography related to benefit in screening programmes: a favourable balance?

Results from the UK NHS breast screening programme 1994–1999

Radiological peer review of interval cancers in the East Anglian breast screening programme: what are we missing?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About