? Project 2 Digital breast tomosynthesis use has rapidly increased for breast cancer screening, outpacing evidence of effectiveness in community settings for women overall and for specific populations. Emerging evidence suggests tomosynthesis may lower recall rates while simultaneously improving cancer detection. However, critical questions remain: whether early reports of improved screening outcomes remain in beyond initial screening rounds and are sustainable in community settings; whether tomosynthesis outcomes vary based on woman, radiologist, or facility characteristics; whether tomosynthesis is equal to or outperforms supplemental screening; and whether additional cancers detected are likely to lead to reduced morbidity and mortality from breast cancer. With the rapid shift to tomosynthesis as the dominant screening modality, a thorough understanding of its effectiveness in community settings across subgroups of women is needed. In our current P01, using the rich data resource of the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC), we have demonstrated the importance of multi-level factors, including woman, radiologist, and facility characteristics, on digital mammography screening outcomes. Given the quick uptake of tomosynthesis in the BCSC, it is now possible to examine outcomes of tomosynthesis screening in relation to multi-level factors and to quantify the benefit-harm balance. Our overall project objective is to identify the most effective screening strategies that incorporate new screening technologies in community practice based on women's risk factors and multi-level contextual factors. We hypothesize that tomosynthesis will perform better than digital mammography for some, but not all, women and that there are some women who may benefit from multi-modal screening. We will also evaluate whether tomosynthesis can reduce the need for supplemental screening ultrasound and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in women at high risk of a missed cancer on digital mammography. We specifically aim to determine:
Aim 1) the benefits and harms of screening tomosynthesis compared to digital mammography based on women's characteristics and multi-level contextual factors, particularly among women at risk of poor screening outcomes (as determined in Project 1 and facilitated by the Biostatistics and Data Management Core);
Aim 2) the observed benefits and harms of multi-modality screening (digital mammography with supplemental ultrasound and/or MRI) versus tomosynthesis alone;
and Aim 3) the long- term benefits (e.g., deaths averted from breast cancer and life years gained) and harms from multi-modality screening versus tomosynthesis screening alone among women at higher risk for screening failures through simulation modeling (in conjunction with the Comparative Effectiveness Core). This project will fill critical knowledge gaps regarding the effectiveness of tomosynthesis and multi-modality screening, which we believe will have direct translation into actionable screening guidelines. 1

Public Health Relevance

? Project 2 Tomosynthesis is rapidly being adopted across the US for breast cancer screening, and is expected to supplant digital mammography based, in part, on early evidence showing lower recall rates and higher cancer detection rates. Project 2 will quantify outcomes from tomosynthesis compared to digital mammography screening and multi-modality imaging (ultrasound and breast magnetic resonance imaging) overall and for clinical risk and sociodemographic subgroups. Findings will fill critical knowledge gaps regarding the effectiveness of tomosynthesis and multi-modality screening and inform the tens of millions of women engaged in breast cancer screening.

Agency
National Institute of Health (NIH)
Institute
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Type
Research Program Projects (P01)
Project #
5P01CA154292-07
Application #
9519970
Study Section
Special Emphasis Panel (ZCA1)
Project Start
Project End
Budget Start
2018-06-01
Budget End
2019-05-31
Support Year
7
Fiscal Year
2018
Total Cost
Indirect Cost
Name
University of California Davis
Department
Type
DUNS #
047120084
City
Davis
State
CA
Country
United States
Zip Code
95618
Lee, Sandra J; Li, Xiaoxue; Huang, Hui et al. (2018) The Dana-Farber CISNET Model for Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: An Update. Med Decis Making 38:44S-53S
Braithwaite, Dejana; Miglioretti, Diana L; Zhu, Weiwei et al. (2018) Family History and Breast Cancer Risk Among Older Women in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium Cohort. JAMA Intern Med 178:494-501
Miles, Randy; Wan, Fei; Onega, Tracy L et al. (2018) Underutilization of Supplemental Magnetic Resonance Imaging Screening Among Patients at High Breast Cancer Risk. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 27:748-754
Munoz, Diego F; Plevritis, Sylvia K (2018) Estimating Breast Cancer Survival by Molecular Subtype in the Absence of Screening and Adjuvant Treatment. Med Decis Making 38:32S-43S
Buist, Diana S M; Abraham, Linn; Lee, Christoph I et al. (2018) Breast Biopsy Intensity and Findings Following Breast Cancer Screening in Women With and Without a Personal History of Breast Cancer. JAMA Intern Med 178:458-468
Nutter, Ellen L; Weiss, Julia E; Marotti, Jonathan D et al. (2018) Personal history of proliferative breast disease with atypia and risk of multifocal breast cancer. Cancer 124:1350-1357
Sprague, Brian L; Vacek, Pamela M; Herschorn, Sally D et al. (2018) Time-varying risks of second events following a DCIS diagnosis in the population-based Vermont DCIS cohort. Breast Cancer Res Treat :
Henderson, Louise M; Hubbard, Rebecca A; Zhu, Weiwei et al. (2018) Preoperative Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Use by Breast Density and Family History of Breast Cancer. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 27:987-993
Plevritis, Sylvia K; Munoz, Diego; Kurian, Allison W et al. (2018) Association of Screening and Treatment With Breast Cancer Mortality by Molecular Subtype in US Women, 2000-2012. JAMA 319:154-164
Trentham-Dietz, Amy; Ergun, Mehmet Ali; Alagoz, Oguzhan et al. (2018) Comparative effectiveness of incorporating a hypothetical DCIS prognostic marker into breast cancer screening. Breast Cancer Res Treat 168:229-239

Showing the most recent 10 out of 190 publications