Digital breast tomosynthesis plus synthesised images versus standard full-field digital mammography in population-based screening (TOSYMA): protocol of a randomised controlled trial

Stefanie Weigel, Joachim Gerss, Hans-Werner Hense, Miriam Krischke, Alexander Sommer, Jörg Czwoydzinski, Horst Lenzen, Laura Kerschke, Karin Spieker, Stefanie Dickmaenken, Sonja Baier, Marc Urban, Gerold Hecht, Oliver Heidinger, Joachim Kieschke, Walter Heindel, Stefanie Weigel, Joachim Gerss, Hans-Werner Hense, Miriam Krischke, Alexander Sommer, Jörg Czwoydzinski, Horst Lenzen, Laura Kerschke, Karin Spieker, Stefanie Dickmaenken, Sonja Baier, Marc Urban, Gerold Hecht, Oliver Heidinger, Joachim Kieschke, Walter Heindel

Abstract

Introduction: Development of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) provides a technology that generates three-dimensional data sets, thus reducing the pitfalls of overlapping breast tissue. Observational studies suggest that the combination of two-dimensional (2D) digital mammography and DBT increases diagnostic accuracy. However, because of duplicate exposure, this comes at the cost of an augmented radiation dose. This undesired adverse impact can be avoided by using synthesised 2D images reconstructed from the DBT data (s2D).We designed a diagnostic superiority trial on a high level of evidence with the aim of providing a comparison of screening efficacy parameters resulting from DBT+s2D versus the current screening standard 2D full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in a multicentre and multivendor setting on the basis of the quality-controlled, population-based, biennial mammography screening programme in Germany.

Methods and analysis: 80 000 women in the eligible age 50-69 years attending the routine mammography screening programme and willing to participate in the TOSYMA trial will be assigned by 1:1 randomisation to either the intervention arm (DBT+s2D) or the control arm (FFDM) during a 12-month recruitment period in screening units of North Rhine-Westphalia and Lower Saxony. State cancer registries will provide the follow-up of interval cancers.Primary endpoints are the detection rate of invasive breast cancers at screening examination and the cumulative incidence of interval cancers in the 2 years after a negative examination. Secondary endpoints are the detection rate of ductal carcinoma in situ and of tumour size T1, the recall rate for assessment, the positive predictive value of recall and the cumulative 12-month incidence of interval cancers. An adaptive statistical design with one interim analysis provides the option to modify the design.

Ethics and dissemination: This protocol has been approved by the local medical ethical committee (2016-132-f-S). Results will be submitted to international peer-reviewed journals.

Trial registration: NCT03377036; Pre-results.

Keywords: breast imaging; digital breast tomosynthesis; full-field digital mammography; multicenter randomized controlled trial; population-based screening; synthetic mammography.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: HWH and OH receives third-party funding from the German Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS, Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz) for a research project on the evaluation of the German mammography screening program. WH runs the National Mammography Reference Center Münster, a third-party-funded project at the University of Münster, Germany.

© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of the screening study. DBT, digital breast tomosynthesis; LS, Lower Saxony; NRW, North Rhine-Westphalia; s2D, synthetic two-dimensional mammogram; 2D-FFDM, two-dimensional full-field digital mammography.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Invasive lobular carcinoma of the right breast depicted by an architectural distortion (A) subtle finding on the two-dimensional full-field digital mammogram (B) pronounced visible on the slice of the digital tomosynthesis as well as on the (C) reconstructed synthetic mammogram.

References

    1. Robert Koch Institute and the Association of Population-based Cancer Registries in Germany. Cancer in Germany 2011/2012. 10th edn Berlin: Robert Koch Institute and the Association of Population-based Cancer Registries in Germany, 2015.
    1. Marmot MG, Altman DG, Cameron DA, et al. . The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Br J Cancer 2013;108:2205–40. 10.1038/bjc.2013.177
    1. Paci E. EUROSCREEN Working Group. Summary of the evidence of breast cancer service screening outcomes in Europe and first estimate of the benefit and harm balance sheet. J Med Screen 2012;19(Suppl 1):5–13. 10.1258/jms.2012.012077
    1. Gotzsche PC, Jørgensen KJ. Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;6:CD001877 10.1002/14651858.CD001877.pub5
    1. Lauby-Secretan B, Loomis D, Straif K. Breast-cancer screening—viewpoint of the IARC Working Group. N Engl J Med 2015;373:1479 10.1056/NEJMc1508733
    1. Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, et al. . European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2006.
    1. Rhiem K, Schmutzler RK. [Risk-adapted surveillance: focus on familial breast and ovarian cancer]. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz 2014;57:307–11. 10.1007/s00103-013-1910-3
    1. Bick U. Intensified surveillance for early detection of breast cancer in high-risk patients. Breast Care 2015;10:13–20. 10.1159/000375390
    1. Ciatto S, Houssami N, Bernardi D, et al. . Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomosynthesis for population breast-cancer screening (STORM): a prospective comparison study. Lancet Oncol 2013;14:583–9. 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70134-7
    1. Skaane P, Bandos AI, Gullien R, et al. . Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a population-based screening program. Radiology 2013;267:47–56. 10.1148/radiol.12121373
    1. Friedewald SM, Rafferty EA, Rose SL, et al. . Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography. JAMA 2014;311:2499–507. 10.1001/jama.2014.6095
    1. Skaane P, Bandos AI, Eben EB, et al. . Two-view digital breast tomosynthesis screening with synthetically reconstructed projection images: comparison with digital breast tomosynthesis with full-field digital mammographic images. Radiology 2014;271:655–63. 10.1148/radiol.13131391
    1. Gilbert FJ, Tucker L, Gillan MG, et al. . The TOMMY trial: a comparison of TOMosynthesis with digital MammographY in the UK NHS Breast Screening Programme – a multicentre retrospective reading study comparing the diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography with digital mammography alone. Health Technol Assess 2015;19:1–136. 10.3310/hta19040
    1. Gilbert FJ, Tucker L, Gillan MG, et al. . Accuracy of digital breast tomosynthesis for depicting breast cancer subgroups in a UK retrospective reading study (TOMMY Trial). Radiology 2015;277:697–706. 10.1148/radiol.2015142566
    1. Zuckerman SP, Conant EF, Keller BM, et al. . Implementation of synthesized two-dimensional mammography in a population-based digital breast tomosynthesis screening program. Radiology 2016;281:730–6. 10.1148/radiol.2016160366
    1. Aujero MP, Gavenonis SC, Benjamin R, et al. . Clinical performance of synthesized two-dimensional mammography combined with tomosynthesis in a large screening population. Radiology 2017;283:70–6. 10.1148/radiol.2017162674
    1. Bernardi D, Macaskill P, Pellegrini M, et al. . Breast cancer screening with tomosynthesis (3D mammography) with acquired or synthetic 2D mammography compared with 2D mammography alone (STORM-2): a population-based prospective study. Lancet Oncol 2016;17:1105–13. 10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30101-2
    1. Garayoa J, Chevalier M, Castillo M, et al. . Diagnostic value of the stand-alone synthetic image in digital breast tomosynthesis examinations. Eur Radiol 2018;28:565–72. 10.1007/s00330-017-4991-9
    1. Caumo F, Zorzi M, Brunelli S, et al. . Digital breast tomosynthesis with synthesized two-dimensional images versus full-field digital mammography for population screening: outcomes from the Verona screening program. Radiology 2018;287:37–46. 10.1148/radiol.2017170745
    1. Houssami N. Evidence on synthesized two-dimensional mammography versus digital mammography when using tomosynthesis (three-dimensional mammography) for population breast cancer screening. Clin Breast Cancer 2017. 10.1016/j.clbc.2017.09.012 (Epub ahead of print 28 Sep 2017). 10.1016/j.clbc.2017.09.012
    1. Heidinger O, Batzler WU, Krieg V, et al. . The incidence of interval cancers in the German mammography screening program: results from the population-based cancer registry in North Rhine-Westphalia. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2012;109:781–7. 10.3238/arztebl.2012.0781
    1. Urbschat I, Heidinger O. [Determination of interval cancer rates in the German mammography screening program using population-based cancer registry data]. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz 2014;57:68–76. 10.1007/s00103-013-1883-2
    1. Houssami N, Bernardi D, Caumo F, et al. . Interval breast cancers in the ’screening with tomosynthesis or standard mammography' (STORM) population-based trial. Breast 2018;38:150–3. 10.1016/j.breast.2018.01.002
    1. Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss. Krebsfrüherkennungs-Richtlinie, 2017.
    1. Malek D, Kääb-Sanyal V. Implementation of the German Mammography Screening Program (German MSP) and first results for initial examinations, 2005–2009. Breast Care 2016;11:183–7. 10.1159/000446359
    1. Imai K. Statistical analysis of randomized experiments with non-ignorable missing binary outcomes: an application to a voting experiment. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C 2009;58:83–104. 10.1111/j.1467-9876.2008.00637.x
    1. Nekolla EA, Griebel J, Brix G. [Radiation risk associated with mammography screening examinations for women younger than 50 years of age]. Z Med Phys 2008;18:170–9.

Source: PubMed

3
Iratkozz fel