Diagnostic Imaging (7/2) reports on a study published in the Journal of Women’s Health finding that “nearly half of women who have a high lifetime breast cancer risk undergo routine screening mammography, yet supplemental breast MR imaging remains widely underutilized in this group.” The study included data from “422,406 women who underwent routine mammography screening across 86 Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) facilities in 2012.” Overall, researchers found that about 44 percent (2,403 of 5,468) of women with the high lifetime risk went to a “facility with on-site breast MRI screening availability,” but just 6.6 percent of them “obtained breast MRI screening within a two-year window of their screening mammogram.”
The Radiology Business Journal (7/2, Walter) reports on a study published in the Journal of the American College of Radiology finding that “when using digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) for screening mammography, radiologists can reduce recall rates by comparing their results with prior mammograms.” The study included “more than 8,000 mammograms...performed using a combination of full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and DBT, and more than 1,000...using FFDM only.” The researchers found that “comparing the screening mammogram with prior mammograms negated the need for recall for more than 67 percent of patients from the DBT group and for more than 55 percent of patients from the FFDM only group.”
Aunt Minnie (7/2, Yee) reports that a study published in the Journal of the American College of Radiology indicates that “having access to prior mammography images and comparing them with current digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) exams reduced recalls by almost 70%.” Dr. Laura Hardesty of the University of Colorado and colleagues wrote, “Our results demonstrate that comparison with prior mammograms has a similar effect on recall negation for mammograms performed with DBT as it does for mammograms performed with [DM].”
Aunt Minnie (6/29) reports researchers have used artificial intelligence (AI) technology to “analyze how radiologists read mammograms,” according to a study published in the Journal of Medical Imaging. The researchers from Oak Ridge National Laboratory “used an artificial intelligence tool to assess the level of bias” – such as context bias and the radiologists’ previous diagnostic experiences – in mammography interpretations by tracking the “eye movements of three board-certified radiologists and seven radiology residents.” The study “found that the radiologists’ analyses of mammograms were significantly influenced by context bias, and while radiology trainees were perhaps most vulnerable to the phenomenon, even more-experienced radiologists fell victim to some degree.”
The Radiology Business Journal (6/29, Walter) reported that research suggests “breast imaging specialists provide significant value to patients when conducting second-opinion review of imaging studies, even before the patient is diagnosed with breast cancer.” The researchers wrote, “Overall, 51 percent of patients who sought a second opinion by a breast imaging specialist at our cancer center received a significant interpretation change.” The findings were published in the Journal of the American College of Radiology.