Tomosynthesis (TS) or Ultrasound (US) in Mammography-negative Dense Breasts (TOMUS). National Multicenter Trial (TOMUS)

January 25, 2017 updated by: Alberto Tagliafico, University of Genova

Breast cancer remains a worldwide big killer with a rate of deaths compared with newly diagnosed cases not lower than 20%. Mammography is the primary imaging modality for the early detection of clinically occult breast cancer. Mammography is established as the primary investigation for population-based breast cancer screening. Advances in mammographic technique regarding both hardware and software applications are still not sufficient to overcome mammography's limitation with regard to both sensitivity and specificity. Depending on several factors, such as age and breast density, mammography screening is associated with a false-negative rate of 10-20 %.

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (TS) is a novel technique that is able to study the breast using 3D reconstructions of the tissue from multiple low-dose digital mammographic images acquired in several planes in a 15 to 50 degree angle. This process aims at a increasing the number of lesion visible due to the reduction of overlapping breast tissue.

In TS, to overcome these limitations, a digital mammography (DM) unit is modified to allow the X-ray tube to move through a proscribed arc of excursion acquiring a fixed number of discrete projection images while the breast remains in compression. The individual projection images are extremely low in dose, so the composite dose incurred during a TS acquisition may be similar to that of a standard 2D mammography. The radiologically dense breasts are associated with decreased sensitivity of mammography, both in the clinical and screening setting as well as its established association with breast cancer risk. The systematic application of ultrasound (US) in women with radiologically dense breasts and negative mammogram has been shown to be associated with an additional cancer detection rate [7,8,9]. Incremental ultrasound detection of cancer may be considered in the range of 0.27% to 0.52% of ultrasound-screened women in different density categories [10]. In addition, the main limitation of US in breast screening is represented by false- positive findings. These findings result in additional investigation or unnecessary surgical biopsy [10].

Study Overview

Status

Unknown

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

Breast cancer remains a worldwide big killer with a rate of deaths compared with newly diagnosed cases not lower than 20%. Mammography is the primary imaging modality for the early detection of clinically occult breast cancer. Mammography is established as the primary investigation for population-based breast cancer screening. Advances in mammographic technique regarding both hardware and software applications are still not sufficient to overcome mammography's limitation with regard to both sensitivity and specificity. Depending on several factors, such as age and breast density, mammography screening is associated with a false-negative rate of 10-20 %.

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (TS) is a novel technique that is able to study the breast using 3D reconstructions of the tissue from multiple low-dose digital mammographic images acquired in several planes in a 15 to 50 degree angle. This process aims at a increasing the number of lesion visible due to the reduction of overlapping breast tissue.

In TS, to overcome these limitations, a digital mammography (DM) unit is modified to allow the X-ray tube to move through a proscribed arc of excursion acquiring a fixed number of discrete projection images while the breast remains in compression. The individual projection images are extremely low in dose, so the composite dose incurred during a TS acquisition may be similar to that of a standard 2D mammography. The radiologically dense breasts are associated with decreased sensitivity of mammography, both in the clinical and screening setting as well as its established association with breast cancer risk. The systematic application of ultrasound (US) in women with radiologically dense breasts and negative mammogram has been shown to be associated with an additional cancer detection rate. Incremental ultrasound detection of cancer may be considered in the range of 0.27% to 0.52% of ultrasound-screened women in different density categories [10]. In addition, the main limitation of US in breast screening is represented by false- positive findings. These findings result in additional investigation or unnecessary surgical biopsy.

The study aims to demonstrate at least statistical equivalence, or non-significant difference between TS and US in women with dense breasts.

If the equivalence between TS and US will be demonstrated, US may be substituted by TS with great benefits for the patients and for the healthcare resources we aim to:

  1. Assess if TS may detect additional cancers in dense breasts that approximate US detection capability but with less false positive findings than US.
  2. If TS detects new cancers in dense breasts similarly to US (approximate rate or marginally lower rate), evaluate the true positive/false positive ratio.
  3. Cost-analysis. In case of less false positives detected by TS, the TP/ FP trade-off might be strongly in favour of TS with a great potential of costs reduction.

Study Type

Observational

Enrollment (Anticipated)

8000

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

      • Genova, Italy, 16132
        • Recruiting
        • Unige

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 70 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

Female

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Women who undergo breast TS and Mammography

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Asymptomatic subjects <50 years of age presenting for mammography, with the exception of those that, on previous mammograms are found to have breast density BI- RADS D1-2.
  • Asymptomatic subjects ≥ 50 years of age who request mammography and have breast density BI-RADS 3-4.
  • Written Informed consent.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Pregnant and breast feeding women
  • Unable to tolerate breast compression
  • Breast implants
  • Unable to understand or execute written informed consent
  • Unable or unwilling to agree to follow-up during observation period

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort
Intervention / Treatment
Tomosynthesis
Patients undergoing Digital Breast Tomosynthesis
Ultrasound examination

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Incremental Cancer Detection Rate or Area Under the Curve
Time Frame: 2 years
The study aims to demonstrate at least statistical equivalence, or non-significant difference between TS and US in women with dense breasts.
2 years

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
TP/FP rate
Time Frame: 2 years

If the equivalence between TS and US will be demonstrated, US may be substituted by TS with great benefits for the patients and for the healthcare resources we aim to:

  1. Assess if TS may detect additional cancers in dense breasts that approximate US detection capability but with less false positive findings than US.
  2. If TS detects new cancers in dense breasts similarly to US (approximate rate or marginally lower rate), evaluate the true positive/false positive ratio.
  3. Cost-analysis. In case of less false positives detected by TS, the TP/ FP trade-off might be strongly in favour of TS with a great potential of costs reduction.
2 years

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

February 1, 2014

Primary Completion (Anticipated)

September 1, 2018

Study Completion (Anticipated)

September 1, 2021

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

January 24, 2017

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 25, 2017

First Posted (Estimate)

January 26, 2017

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

January 26, 2017

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 25, 2017

Last Verified

January 1, 2017

More Information

Terms related to this study

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Subscribe