Breast Density and Breast Cancer Screening with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: A TOSYMA Trial Subanalysis
- PMID: 36194110
- DOI: 10.1148/radiol.221006
Breast Density and Breast Cancer Screening with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: A TOSYMA Trial Subanalysis
Abstract
Background Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) plus synthesized mammography (SM) reduces the diagnostic pitfalls of tissue superimposition, which is a limitation of digital mammography (DM). Purpose To compare the invasive breast cancer detection rate (iCDR) of DBT plus SM versus DM screening for different breast density categories. Materials and Methods An exploratory subanalysis of the TOmosynthesis plus SYnthesized MAmmography (TOSYMA) study, a randomized, controlled, multicenter, parallel-group trial recruited within the German mammography screening program from July 2018 to December 2020. Women aged 50-69 years were randomly assigned (1:1) to DBT plus SM or DM screening examination. Breast density categories A-D were visually assessed according to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Atlas. Exploratory analyses were performed of the iCDR in both study arms and stratified by breast density, and odds ratios and 95% CIs were determined. Results A total of 49 762 women allocated to DBT plus SM and 49 796 allocated to DM (median age, 57 years [IQR, 53-62 years]) were included. In the DM arm, the iCDR was 3.6 per 1000 screening examinations in category A (almost entirely fatty) (16 of 4475 screenings), 4.3 in category B (102 of 23 534 screenings), 6.1 in category C (116 of 19 051 screenings), and 2.3 in category D (extremely dense breasts) (six of 2629 screenings). The iCDR in the DBT plus SM arm was 2.7 per 1000 screening examinations in category A (12 of 4439 screenings), 6.9 in category B (154 of 22 328 screenings), 8.3 in category C (156 of 18 772 screenings), and 8.1 in category D (32 of 3940 screenings). The odds ratio for DM versus DBT plus SM in category D was 3.8 (95% CI: 1.5, 11.1). The invasive cancers detected with DBT plus SM were most often grade 2 tumors; in category C, it was 58% (91 of 156 invasive cancers), and in category D, it was 47% (15 of 32 invasive cancers). Conclusion The TOmosynthesis plus SYnthesized MAmmography trial revealed higher invasive cancer detection rates with digital breast tomosynthesis plus synthesized mammography than digital mammography in dense breasts, relatively and absolutely most marked among women with extremely dense breasts. ClinicalTrials.gov registration no.: NCT03377036 © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Lee and Moy in this issue.
Comment in
-
Lessons Learned from the Randomized Controlled TOmosynthesis plus SYnthesized MAmmography (TOSYMA) Trial.Radiology. 2023 Feb;306(2):e222178. doi: 10.1148/radiol.222178. Epub 2022 Oct 4. Radiology. 2023. PMID: 36194117 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Digital Breast Tomosynthesis versus Digital Mammography for Detection of Early-Stage Cancers Stratified by Grade: A TOSYMA Subanalysis.Radiology. 2023 Dec;309(3):e231533. doi: 10.1148/radiol.231533. Radiology. 2023. PMID: 38051184 Clinical Trial.
-
Radiation exposure and screening yield by digital breast tomosynthesis compared to mammography: results of the TOSYMA Trial breast density related.Eur Radiol. 2025 Jan;35(1):166-176. doi: 10.1007/s00330-024-10847-9. Epub 2024 Jul 16. Eur Radiol. 2025. PMID: 39012526 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Comparing Screening Outcomes for Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Digital Mammography by Automated Breast Density in a Randomized Controlled Trial: Results from the To-Be Trial.Radiology. 2020 Dec;297(3):522-531. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020201150. Epub 2020 Sep 15. Radiology. 2020. PMID: 32930649 Clinical Trial.
-
Supplemental Screening for Breast Cancer in Women With Dense Breasts: A Systematic Review for the U.S. Preventive Service Task Force [Internet].Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2016 Jan. Report No.: 14-05201-EF-3. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2016 Jan. Report No.: 14-05201-EF-3. PMID: 26866210 Free Books & Documents. Review.
-
Digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer screening and diagnosis in women with dense breasts - a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC Cancer. 2018 Apr 3;18(1):380. doi: 10.1186/s12885-018-4263-3. BMC Cancer. 2018. PMID: 29615072 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Translating radiological research into practice-from discovery to clinical impact.Insights Imaging. 2024 Jan 17;15(1):13. doi: 10.1186/s13244-023-01596-2. Insights Imaging. 2024. PMID: 38228934 Free PMC article.
-
In the era of personalized screening who can benefit more from screening with breast tomosynthesis?Eur Radiol. 2025 Jan;35(1):163-165. doi: 10.1007/s00330-024-11037-3. Epub 2024 Aug 28. Eur Radiol. 2025. PMID: 39196409 No abstract available.
-
Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Update 2023.Breast Care (Basel). 2023 Aug;18(4):289-305. doi: 10.1159/000531578. Epub 2023 Jun 16. Breast Care (Basel). 2023. PMID: 37900552 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Impact of digital breast tomosynthesis on screening performance and interval cancer rates compared to digital mammography: A meta-analysis.PLoS One. 2025 Jan 31;20(1):e0315466. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0315466. eCollection 2025. PLoS One. 2025. PMID: 39888906 Free PMC article.
-
Performance of dedicated breast PET in breast cancer screening: comparison with digital mammography plus digital breast tomosynthesis and ultrasound.Ann Nucl Med. 2023 Sep;37(9):479-493. doi: 10.1007/s12149-023-01846-9. Epub 2023 Jun 6. Ann Nucl Med. 2023. PMID: 37280410
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical