Table 1 |
||||||||||
|
Comparative sensitivity of screening methods in women at increased risk for breast cancer |
||||||||||
|
Study site and reference |
Study design |
Follow-up, months |
Mean age, years (range) |
Cancers detected/screened, (%) |
Sensitivity (%) |
Cancer yield from MRI alone (%) [95% CI]a |
Biopsies recommended as a result of MRI, % |
PPV of biopsies performed on basis of MRI, % |
||
|
|
||||||||||
|
Mammography |
MRI |
Ultrasound |
||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
Germany [19] |
P |
12 |
39 (18–65) |
4.7 (9/192) |
33 (3/9) |
100 (9/9) |
33 (3/9) |
6/192 (3.1) [0.9–6.0] |
14/192 (7.3) |
64 |
|
Canada [20] |
P |
36 |
47 (26–65) |
9.3 (22/236) |
36 (8/22) |
77 (17/22) |
33 (7/21) |
7/236 (3.0)d [1.7–7.1] |
37/236 (15.7) |
46 |
|
Italy [21] |
P |
24 |
46 (25–77) |
7.6 (8/105) |
13 (1/8) |
100 (8/8) |
13 (1/8) |
7/105 (6.7) [2.7–13.3] |
9/105 (8.6) |
89 |
|
Netherlands [22] |
P |
12 |
42 (22–68) |
2.8 (3/109) |
0 |
100 (3/3) |
- |
3/109 (2.8) [0.6–7.8] |
5/109 (4.6) |
60 |
|
United States [23] |
R |
None |
50b (23–82) |
3.8 (14/367) |
0c |
100 (14/14) |
- |
14/367 (3.8) [2.1–6.3] |
59/367 (15.8) |
24 |
|
Netherlands [24] |
P |
33 |
40 (19–72) |
2.4 (45/1,909)e |
40 (18/45) |
71 (32/45) |
- |
22/1,909 (1.2) [1.1–2.4] |
56/1,909 (2.9) |
57 |
|
International [25] |
P |
None |
45 (26–86) |
1.1 (4/367) |
25(1/4) |
100 (4/4) |
- |
3/367 (0.8) [0.2–2.4] |
23/367 (6.3) |
17 |
|
|
||||||||||
|
P, prospective; PPV, positive predictive value; R, retrospective. aExact binomial confidence intervals. bReported median. cTo be included in this study, subjects had to have a negative mammogram. dOne patient who had an MRI-only cancer in this study did not receive ultrasound. eComparable sensitivity reported on 45 of 51 cancers in this study. |
||||||||||
|
Lehman and Schnall Breast Cancer Research 2005 7:215 doi:10.1186/bcr1309 |
||||||||||