Performance of Diagnostic Mammography for Women With Signs or Symptoms of Breast Cancer

Background: The performance of diagnostic mammography for women with signs or symptoms of breast cancer has not been well studied. We evaluated whether age, breast density, self-reported breast lump, and previous mammography influence the performance of diagnostic mammography. Methods: From January...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:JNCI : Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2002-08, Vol.94 (15), p.1151-1159
Main Authors: Barlow, William E., Lehman, Constance D., Zheng, Yingye, Ballard-Barbash, Rachel, Yankaskas, Bonnie C., Cutter, Gary R., Carney, Patricia A., Geller, Berta M., Rosenberg, Robert, Kerlikowske, Karla, Weaver, Donald L., Taplin, Stephen H.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Biological and medical sciences
Breast cancer
Breast Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging
Female
Genital system. Mammary gland
Humans
Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)
Mammography
Medical diagnosis
Medical sciences
Middle Aged
Multivariate Analysis
Radiodiagnosis. Nmr imagery. Nmr spectrometry
Sensitivity and Specificity
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background: The performance of diagnostic mammography for women with signs or symptoms of breast cancer has not been well studied. We evaluated whether age, breast density, self-reported breast lump, and previous mammography influence the performance of diagnostic mammography. Methods: From January 1996 through March 1998, prospective diagnostic mammography data from women aged 25–89 years with no previous breast cancer were linked to cancer outcomes data in six mammography registries participating in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. We used the final mammographic assessment at the end of the imaging work-up to determine abnormal mammographic examination rate, positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. We used age, breast density, prior mammogram, and self-reported breast lump jointly as predictors of performance. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Of 41 427 diagnostic mammograms, 6279 (15.2%) were judged abnormal. The overall PPV was 21.8%, sensitivity was 85.8%, and specificity was 87.7%. Multivariate analysis showed that sensitivity and specificity generally declined as breast density increased (P = .007 and P
ISSN:0027-8874
1460-2105
1460-2105
DOI:10.1093/jnci/94.15.1151