Aims and objectives
To assess the non-malignant biopsy results of a United Kingdom based Breast Screening Centre and to evaluate the benign biopsy rates for individual BI-RADS categories.
Methods and materials
West Kent National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) screening mammograms over a period of five years (April 2008 – March 2013) were included in the study.
Allmammograms were double read and the recalled patients' films were categorized prospectively,
using BI-RADS criteria [1,2].
The number of recalled patients and biopsy results for each individual BI-RADS category were evaluated.
Results
A total of 86422 mammograms were read and 4156 patients were recalled for assessment.
Overall recall rate was 4.8%.
3253 of the recalled patients (78,4%) were coded as BI-RADS 4A or below,
while the number of patients coded as BI-RADS 4B,
4C and 5 were as follows,
321 (7,7%),
368 (8,8%) and 214 (5,1%) respectively (see Table 1).
1279 patients underwent core tissue biopsy,
and 736 (58%)of these appeared to be malignant.
Overall cancer detection rate was 0.85%.
However,
in 543 patients,
the biopsy result...
Conclusion
Whether breast cancer screening does more harm than good has been debated extensively.
The main questions arehow large the benefit of screening is in terms of reduced breast cancer mortality and how substantial the harm is interms of overdiagnosis [3].
The major harms consist of false positiveresults,
unnecessary additional imaging,
and theneed for biopsy and potential biopsy related complications.
However,
in a study carried out by Ganott et al.,
asubstantial fraction of women would havepreferred the inconvenience of and anxiety associated witha higher recall rate...
Personal information
Burak Omay,
M.D.
Department of Radiology,
Faculty of Medicine,
Hacettepe University,
Ankara,
Turkey;
[email protected]
Ali Riza Sever,
M.D.
Department of Radiology,
Faculty of Medicine,
Hacettepe University,
Ankara,
Turkey;
[email protected]
Jennifer Weeks,
M.D.
Department of Radiology,
Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells Breast Clinic,
Maidstone,
UK;
[email protected]
Ruxandra Pietrosanu,
M.D.
Department of Radiology,
Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells Breast Clinic,
Maidstone,
UK;
[email protected]
Pippa Mills,
M.D.
Department of Radiology,
Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells Breast Clinic,
Maidstone,
UK;
[email protected]
References
1.D’Orsi CJ,
Mendelson EB,
Ikeda DM,
et al.
Breastimaging reporting and data system: ACR BIRADS– breast imaging atlas.
Reston (VA): American College of Radiology; 2003.
2.Destaunis SV,
Sickles EA,
Mendelson EB,
et al.
BIRADSUpdate and challenge (an interactive session).Refresher Course the 99th Annual Meeting ofthe Radiological Society of North America,
RSNA.Chicago,
December 4,
2013.
3.
The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review.
Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening.
Lancet 2012; 380: 1778–86
4.
Ganott MA,
Sumkin JH,
King JL et...
