703388 research-article2017
BCB0010.1177/1178223417703388Breast Cancer: Basic and Clinical ResearchByun et al
Visualization of Breast Microcalcifications on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and 2-Dimensional Digital Mammography Using Specimens
Breast Cancer: Basic and Clinical Research Volume 11: 1–7 © The Author(s) 2017 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1178223417703388 https://doi.org/10.1177/1178223417703388
Jieun Byun, Jee Eun Lee, Eun Suk Cha, Jin Chung and Jeoung Hyun Kim Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
ABSTRACT Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare the visibility of microcalcifications of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and full-field digital mammography (FFDM) using breast specimens. Materials And Methods: Thirty-one specimens’ DBT and FFDM were retrospectively reviewed by four readers. Results: The image quality of microcalcifications of DBT was rated as superior or equivalent in 71.0% by reader 1, 67.8% by reader 2, 64.5% by reader 3, and 80.6% by reader 4. The Fleiss kappa statistic for agreement among readers was 0.31. Conclusions: We suggest that image quality of DBT appears to be comparable with or better than FFDM in terms of revealing microcalcifications. Keywords: Breast microcalcification, digital breast tomosynthesis, full-field digital mammography RECEIVED: October 14, 2016. ACCEPTED: March 9, 2017. Peer Review: Six peer reviewers contributed to the peer review report. Reviewers’ reports totaled 1208 words, excluding any confidential comments to the academic editor. Type: Original Research Funding: The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Introduction
Since 1990, the death rate from breast cancer has decreased by nearly 34% in the United States. Mammography screening has been important in this shift. Screening mammography for breast cancer has led to earlier detection and more timely and effective treatment.1 However, the overlap of tissues depicted on mammography may create significant obstacles to the detection and diagnosis of abnormalities.2 Breast density is now recognized as one of the strongest risk factors for breast malignancy. Several studies were conducted to examine differences in breast density assessed on different image types. Tagliafico et al showed that breast density values in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) were lower than those obtained using 2-dimensional full-field digital mammography (FFDM) according to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS).3–5 When small microcalcifications ( FFDM (%)
DBT = FFDM (%)
DBT FFDM and DBT=FFDM.
Table 4. Readers’ preferred DBT thicknesses (%). 1 mm > 5 mm (%)
1 mm = 5 mm (%)
1 mm 10 mm (%)
1 mm 10 mm (%)
5 mm = 10 mm (%)
5 mm FFDM and DBT = FFDM. a95% CI for 1 mm > 5 mm and 1 mm = 5 mm. b95% CI for 1 mm > 10 mm and 1 mm = 10 mm. c95% CI for 5 mm > 10 mm and 5 mm = 10 mm.
Table 5. Numbers of superiorly or equally visible cases on DBT and FFDM according to the pathology results (%). Reader 1
Reader 2
Malignancy (n = 11)
Benign (n = 20)
Malignancy (n = 11)
Benign (n = 20)
DBT ⩾ FFDM
10 (90.9%)
12 (60.0%)
10 (90.9%)
11 (55.0%)
DBT
BCB0010.1177/1178223417703388Breast Cancer: Basic and Clinical ResearchByun et al
Visualization of Breast Microcalcifications on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and 2-Dimensional Digital Mammography Using Specimens
Breast Cancer: Basic and Clinical Research Volume 11: 1–7 © The Author(s) 2017 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1178223417703388 https://doi.org/10.1177/1178223417703388
Jieun Byun, Jee Eun Lee, Eun Suk Cha, Jin Chung and Jeoung Hyun Kim Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
ABSTRACT Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare the visibility of microcalcifications of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and full-field digital mammography (FFDM) using breast specimens. Materials And Methods: Thirty-one specimens’ DBT and FFDM were retrospectively reviewed by four readers. Results: The image quality of microcalcifications of DBT was rated as superior or equivalent in 71.0% by reader 1, 67.8% by reader 2, 64.5% by reader 3, and 80.6% by reader 4. The Fleiss kappa statistic for agreement among readers was 0.31. Conclusions: We suggest that image quality of DBT appears to be comparable with or better than FFDM in terms of revealing microcalcifications. Keywords: Breast microcalcification, digital breast tomosynthesis, full-field digital mammography RECEIVED: October 14, 2016. ACCEPTED: March 9, 2017. Peer Review: Six peer reviewers contributed to the peer review report. Reviewers’ reports totaled 1208 words, excluding any confidential comments to the academic editor. Type: Original Research Funding: The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Introduction
Since 1990, the death rate from breast cancer has decreased by nearly 34% in the United States. Mammography screening has been important in this shift. Screening mammography for breast cancer has led to earlier detection and more timely and effective treatment.1 However, the overlap of tissues depicted on mammography may create significant obstacles to the detection and diagnosis of abnormalities.2 Breast density is now recognized as one of the strongest risk factors for breast malignancy. Several studies were conducted to examine differences in breast density assessed on different image types. Tagliafico et al showed that breast density values in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) were lower than those obtained using 2-dimensional full-field digital mammography (FFDM) according to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS).3–5 When small microcalcifications ( FFDM (%)
DBT = FFDM (%)
DBT FFDM and DBT=FFDM.
Table 4. Readers’ preferred DBT thicknesses (%). 1 mm > 5 mm (%)
1 mm = 5 mm (%)
1 mm 10 mm (%)
1 mm 10 mm (%)
5 mm = 10 mm (%)
5 mm FFDM and DBT = FFDM. a95% CI for 1 mm > 5 mm and 1 mm = 5 mm. b95% CI for 1 mm > 10 mm and 1 mm = 10 mm. c95% CI for 5 mm > 10 mm and 5 mm = 10 mm.
Table 5. Numbers of superiorly or equally visible cases on DBT and FFDM according to the pathology results (%). Reader 1
Reader 2
Malignancy (n = 11)
Benign (n = 20)
Malignancy (n = 11)
Benign (n = 20)
DBT ⩾ FFDM
10 (90.9%)
12 (60.0%)
10 (90.9%)
11 (55.0%)
DBT
