Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) represent a new breast imaging technology recently approved by the FDA with the potential to increase cancer detection while significantly reducing the need for call back and follow up examinations. The Breast Imaging Division at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania will transition its screening practice that to DBT. Project 1 will take advantage of the transition DBT to measure screening related outcomes, xray dose and costs associated with routine DBT based screening and compare it to a cohort screened with planar digital mammography (DM). During the transition, patients will either undergo DBT or DM screening on a first come first serve basis. The comparison cohort will be the population screened at HUP with DM. Screening outcomes measured include call backs, follow ups, Ultrasound exams, biopsies and cancer. Mean gladular xray dose will be calculated for every projection of DM and DBT exams. Costs associated with the screening exam, and downstream costs associated with the diagnostic work up will be measured in both cohorts. Patients will be surveyed to determine the effect of DBT on satisfaction with the screening process and breast cancer worry. Given the lack of data related to the impact of DBT on breast cancer screening outcomes, project 1 will generate critical data to inform the more widespread implementation of this new technology.

National Institute of Health (NIH)
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Specialized Center--Cooperative Agreements (U54)
Project #
Application #
Study Section
Special Emphasis Panel (ZCA1-SRLB-R (O1))
Project Start
Project End
Budget Start
Budget End
Support Year
Fiscal Year
Total Cost
Indirect Cost
University of Pennsylvania
United States
Zip Code
Zuckerman, Samantha P; Conant, Emily F; Keller, Brad M et al. (2016) Implementation of Synthesized Two-dimensional Mammography in a Population-based Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Program. Radiology 281:730-736
Conant, Emily F; Beaber, Elisabeth F; Sprague, Brian L et al. (2016) Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography compared to digital mammography alone: a cohort study within the PROSPR consortium. Breast Cancer Res Treat 156:109-16
Weiss, Julie E; Goodrich, Martha; Harris, Kimberly A et al. (2016) Challenges With Identifying Indication for Examination in Breast Imaging as a Key Clinical Attribute in Practice, Research, and Policy. J Am Coll Radiol :
Kim, Jane J; Tosteson, Anna Na; Zauber, Ann G et al. (2016) Cancer Models and Real-world Data: Better Together. J Natl Cancer Inst 108:
Korhonen, Katrina E; Weinstein, Susan P; McDonald, Elizabeth S et al. (2016) Strategies to Increase Cancer Detection: Review of True-Positive and False-Negative Results at Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Screening. Radiographics 36:1954-1965
Tosteson, Anna N A; Beaber, Elisabeth F; Tiro, Jasmin et al. (2016) Variation in Screening Abnormality Rates and Follow-Up of Breast, Cervical and Colorectal Cancer Screening within the PROSPR Consortium. J Gen Intern Med 31:372-9
Haas, Jennifer S; Sprague, Brian L; Klabunde, Carrie N et al. (2016) Provider Attitudes and Screening Practices Following Changes in Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening Guidelines. J Gen Intern Med 31:52-9
Chen, Jane S; Sprague, Brian L; Klabunde, Carrie N et al. (2016) Take the money and run? Redemption of a gift card incentive in a clinician survey. BMC Med Res Methodol 16:25
Armstrong, Katrina; Kim, Jane J; Halm, Ethan A et al. (2016) Using lessons from breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening to inform the development of lung cancer screening programs. Cancer 122:1338-42
McCarthy, Anne Marie; Keller, Brad M; Pantalone, Lauren M et al. (2016) Racial Differences in Quantitative Measures of Area and Volumetric Breast Density. J Natl Cancer Inst 108:

Showing the most recent 10 out of 39 publications