Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2012 Oct 2:12:440.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-12-440.

Breast density as indicator for the use of mammography or MRI to screen women with familial risk for breast cancer (FaMRIsc): a multicentre randomized controlled trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Breast density as indicator for the use of mammography or MRI to screen women with familial risk for breast cancer (FaMRIsc): a multicentre randomized controlled trial

Sepideh Saadatmand et al. BMC Cancer. .

Abstract

Background: To reduce mortality, women with a family history of breast cancer often start mammography screening at a younger age than the general population. Breast density is high in over 50% of women younger than 50 years. With high breast density, breast cancer incidence increases, but sensitivity of mammography decreases. Therefore, mammography might not be the optimal method for breast cancer screening in young women. Adding MRI increases sensitivity, but also the risk of false-positive results. The limitation of all previous MRI screening studies is that they do not contain a comparison group; all participants received both MRI and mammography. Therefore, we cannot empirically assess in which stage tumours would have been detected by either test.The aim of the Familial MRI Screening Study (FaMRIsc) is to compare the efficacy of MRI screening to mammography for women with a familial risk. Furthermore, we will assess the influence of breast density.

Methods/design: This Dutch multicentre, randomized controlled trial, with balanced randomisation (1:1) has a parallel grouped design. Women with a cumulative lifetime risk for breast cancer due to their family history of ≥20%, aged 30-55 years are eligible. Identified BRCA1/2 mutation carriers or women with 50% risk of carrying a mutation are excluded. Group 1 receives yearly mammography and clinical breast examination (n = 1000), and group 2 yearly MRI and clinical breast examination, and mammography biennially (n = 1000).Primary endpoints are the number and stage of the detected breast cancers in each arm. Secondary endpoints are the number of false-positive results in both screening arms. Furthermore, sensitivity and positive predictive value of both screening strategies will be assessed. Cost-effectiveness of both strategies will be assessed. Analyses will also be performed with mammographic density as stratification factor.

Discussion: Personalized breast cancer screening might optimize mortality reduction with less over diagnosis. Breast density may be a key discriminator for selecting the optimal screening strategy for women < 55 years with familial breast cancer risk; mammography or MRI. These issues are addressed in the FaMRIsc study including high risk women due to a familial predisposition.

Trial registration: Netherland Trial Register NTR2789.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram Familial MRI Screening Study (FaMRIsc). CLTR: Cumulative Lifetime Risk, MRI: Magnetic Resonance Imaging, CBE: Clinical Breast Examination.

References

    1. Claus EB, Risch N, Thompson WD. Autosomal dominant inheritance of early-onset breast cancer. Implications for risk prediction. Cancer. 1994;73(3):643–651. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19940201)73:3<643::AID-CNCR2820730323>3.0.CO;2-5. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brandt A, Bermejo JL, Sundquist J, Hemminki K. Age of onset in familial breast cancer as background data for medical surveillance. Br J Cancer. 2010;102(1):42–47. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605421. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Margolin S, Johansson H, Rutqvist LE, Lindblom A, Fornander T. Family history, and impact on clinical presentation and prognosis, in a population-based breast cancer cohort from the Stockholm County. Fam Cancer. 2006;5(4):309–321. doi: 10.1007/s10689-006-7851-3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sant M, Allemani C, Capocaccia R, Hakulinen T, Aareleid T, Coebergh JW, Coleman MP, Grosclaude P, Martinez C, Bell J. et al.Stage at diagnosis is a key explanation of differences in breast cancer survival across Europe. Int J Cancer. 2003;106(3):416–422. doi: 10.1002/ijc.11226. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Maurice A, Evans DG, Affen J, Greenhalgh R, Duffy SW, Howell A. Surveillance of women at increased risk of breast cancer using mammography and clinical breast examination: Further evidence of benefit. Int J Cancer. 2012;131(2):417–425. doi: 10.1002/ijc.26394. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types