|
|
||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Breast Imaging |
1 From the Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, 1730 Minor Ave, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 98101 (S.H.T.); Affiliations for all other authors and author contributions are listed at the end of this article. Received March 20, 2001; revision requested April 23; revision received June 20; accepted August 9. Supported by grants U01CA86076 (W.E.B., L.E.I.), U01CA86082 (P.A.C.), U01CA63736 (M.B.D.), U01CA70013 (B.M.G.), U01CA63740 (K.K., E.A.S., V.L.E.), U0169976 (R.D.R.), U01CA63731 (S.H.T.), CAU01CA70040 (B.C.Y.), and R01CA63146 (N.U.) from the National Cancer Institute. Address correspondence to S.H.T. (e-mail: taplin.s@ghc.org). All opinions and findings are the sole responsibility of the authors.
PURPOSE: To examine how frequently Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) mammographic screening assessments were associated with expected clinical management recommendations.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium mammography registries recorded screening assessments and recommendations in 1997 to identify the proportion of women in each BI-RADS category. The first screening assessment for a woman without cancer or a prior mammogram within 9 months was associated with its independently recorded recommendation.
RESULTS: Among 292,795 women, screening assessments included 269,022 (91.9%) with a "negative" or "benign finding," and 267,103 (99.3%) of these women were recommended for normal interval follow-up. Among 11,861 (4.1%) women with screening assessments of "probably benign finding," 4,782 (40.3%) were recommended for short interval follow-up as expected on the basis of the BI-RADS, but a high proportion (36.9%) were recommended for additional imaging. Among 1,625 (0.6%) women with "suspicious abnormality," most were recommended for biopsy (48.7%) or clinical examination and/or surgical consult (9.0%), but many were recommended for additional imaging (38.7%). Among 243 (0.1%) women with screening assessments "highly suggestive of malignancy," a majority were recommended for biopsy (73.3%) or clinical examination and/or surgical consult (18.1%) consistent with BI-RADS, but some were recommended for additional imaging (6.6%).
CONCLUSION: BI-RADS assessments and management recommendations are consistent for negative and benign assessments, but inconsistencies were found in assessments and recommendations for mammographic abnormalities.
Index terms: Breast, ACR Reporting and Data System Breast neoplasms, diagnosis, 00.30 Breast radiography, quality assurance, 00.11 Cancer screening, 00.11, 00.30
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
J. A. Harvey, B. T. Nicholson, and M. A. Cohen Finding Early Invasive Breast Cancers: A Practical Approach Radiology, July 1, 2008; 248(1): 61 - 76. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. J. A. Bowles, D. L. Miglioretti, E. A. Sickles, L. Abraham, P. A. Carney, B. C. Yankaskas, and J. G. Elmore Accuracy of Short-Interval Follow-Up Mammograms by Patient and Radiologist Characteristics Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2008; 190(5): 1200 - 1208. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E.-K. Kim, K. H. Ko, K. K. Oh, J. Y. Kwak, J. K. You, M. J. Kim, and B.-W. Park Clinical Application of the BI-RADS Final Assessment to Breast Sonography in Conjunction with Mammography Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2008; 190(5): 1209 - 1215. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. L. Miglioretti, R. Smith-Bindman, L. Abraham, R. J. Brenner, P. A. Carney, E. J. A. Bowles, D. S. M. Buist, and J. G. Elmore Radiologist Characteristics Associated With Interpretive Performance of Diagnostic Mammography J Natl Cancer Inst, December 19, 2007; 99(24): 1854 - 1863. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. J. Fenton, S. H. Taplin, P. A. Carney, L. Abraham, E. A. Sickles, C. D'Orsi, E. A. Berns, G. Cutter, R. E. Hendrick, W. E. Barlow, et al. Influence of Computer-Aided Detection on Performance of Screening Mammography N. Engl. J. Med., April 5, 2007; 356(14): 1399 - 1409. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. A. Carney, L. A. Abraham, D. L. Miglioretti, K. R. Yabroff, E. A. Sickles, D. S. M. Buist, C. J. Kasales, B. M. Geller, R. D. Rosenberg, M. B. Dignan, et al. Factors Associated with Imaging and Procedural Events Used to Detect Breast Cancer After Screening Mammography Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2007; 188(2): 385 - 392. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. D. Rosenberg, B. C. Yankaskas, L. A. Abraham, E. A. Sickles, C. D. Lehman, B. M. Geller, P. A. Carney, K. Kerlikowske, D. S. M. Buist, D. L. Weaver, et al. Performance Benchmarks for Screening Mammography Radiology, October 1, 2006; 241(1): 55 - 66. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. M. Geller, L. E. Ichikawa, D. S. M. Buist, E. A. Sickles, P. A. Carney, B. C. Yankaskas, M. Dignan, K. Kerlikowske, K. R. Yabroff, W. Barlow, et al. Improving the Concordance of Mammography Assessment and Management Recommendations Radiology, October 1, 2006; 241(1): 67 - 75. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. J. Fenton, J. Egger, P. A. Carney, G. Cutter, C. D'Orsi, E. A. Sickles, J. Fosse, L. Abraham, S. H. Taplin, W. Barlow, et al. Reality check: perceived versus actual performance of community mammographers. Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2006; 187(1): 42 - 46. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Lazarus, M. B. Mainiero, B. Schepps, S. L. Koelliker, and L. S. Livingston BI-RADS Lexicon for US and Mammography: Interobserver Variability and Positive Predictive Value Radiology, May 1, 2006; 239(2): 385 - 391. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. M. Hall, E. A. Sickles, C. Lehman, R. Smith-Bindman, B. C. Yankaskas, B. M. Geller, P. A. Carney, and K. Kerlikowske Short-Interval Follow-up in Screening Mammography * Dr Sickles and colleagues respond: Radiology, October 1, 2005; 237(1): 371 - 373. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Kerlikowske, R. Smith-Bindman, L. A. Abraham, C. D. Lehman, B. C. Yankaskas, R. Ballard-Barbash, W. E. Barlow, J. H. Voeks, B. M. Geller, P. A. Carney, et al. Breast Cancer Yield for Screening Mammographic Examinations with Recommendation for Short-Interval Follow-up Radiology, March 1, 2005; 234(3): 684 - 692. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. C. Yankaskas, S. H. Taplin, L. Ichikawa, B. M. Geller, R. D. Rosenberg, P. A. Carney, K. Kerlikowske, R. Ballard-Barbash, G. R. Cutter, and W. E. Barlow Association between Mammography Timing and Measures of Screening Performance in the United States Radiology, February 1, 2005; 234(2): 363 - 373. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. E. Barlow, C. Chi, P. A. Carney, S. H. Taplin, C. D'Orsi, G. Cutter, R. E. Hendrick, and J. G. Elmore Accuracy of Screening Mammography Interpretation by Characteristics of Radiologists J Natl Cancer Inst, December 15, 2004; 96(24): 1840 - 1850. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Saslow, J. Hannan, J. Osuch, M. H. Alciati, C. Baines, M. Barton, J. K. Bobo, C. Coleman, M. Dolan, G. Gaumer, et al. Clinical Breast Examination: Practical Recommendations for Optimizing Performance and Reporting CA Cancer J Clin, November 1, 2004; 54(6): 327 - 344. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. C. Harvey, B. Geller, R. G. Oppenheimer, M. Pinet, L. Riddell, and B. Garra Increase in Cancer Detection and Recall Rates with Independent Double Interpretation of Screening Mammography Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2003; 180(5): 1461 - 1467. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Kerlikowske, R. Smith-Bindman, and E. A. Sickles Short-Interval Follow-Up Mammography: Are We Doing the Right Thing? J Natl Cancer Inst, March 19, 2003; 95(6): 418 - 419. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Yasmeen, P. S. Romano, M. Pettinger, R. T. Chlebowski, J. A. Robbins, D. S. Lane, and S. L. Hendrix Frequency and Predictive Value of a Mammographic Recommendation for Short-Interval Follow-Up J Natl Cancer Inst, March 19, 2003; 95(6): 429 - 436. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. A. Carney, D. L. Miglioretti, B. C. Yankaskas, K. Kerlikowske, R. Rosenberg, C. M. Rutter, B. M. Geller, L. A. Abraham, S. H. Taplin, M. Dignan, et al. Individual and Combined Effects of Age, Breast Density, and Hormone Replacement Therapy Use on the Accuracy of Screening Mammography Ann Intern Med, February 4, 2003; 138(3): 168 - 175. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. M. Geller, W. E. Barlow, R. Ballard-Barbash, V. L. Ernster, B. C. Yankaskas, E. A. Sickles, P. A. Carney, M. B. Dignan, R. D. Rosenberg, N. Urban, et al. Use of the American College of Radiology BI-RADS to Report on the Mammographic Evaluation of Women with Signs and Symptoms of Breast Disease Radiology, February 1, 2002; 222(2): 536 - 542. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| RADIOLOGY | RADIOGRAPHICS | RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE |