Interval cancer in the Córdoba Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial (CBTST) - comparison of digital breast tomosynthesis plus digital mammography to digital mammography alone

Sep 21, 2026

Uploaded by Maeve

Purpose This work compares interval cancer rate and interval cancer characteristics between women screened with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) plus digital mammography (DM) and women screened with DM alone. Methods Interval cancer rate and characteristics were analyzed in the Córdoba Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial (CBTST) study population and compared with a contemporary DM control population. Tumor features of screen-detected and interval cancers were contrasted using contingency tables, chi-square/Fisher’s exact tests, and Student’s t/Mann–Whitney U tests. Results Among 16,068 DBT+DM exams and 23,787 DM-only screens, interval cancer rate was lower with DBT+DM (15‰ vs 43‰; p=0.045), with a larger difference in dense breasts. Interval cancers were smaller with DBT+DM (p=0.031). Conclusions DBT+DM screening reduced interval cancer rate versus DM alone, especially in women with dense breasts; greatest clinical relevance was observed for dense-breast subgroups.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages12

Reading Time30 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Purpose and Methods

Results and Conclusions

Key Points

Introduction

Pulido‑Carmona et al. European Radiology (2024) 34:5427-5438 [https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330](https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330)‑023‑10546‑x BREAST Interval cancer in the Córdoba Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial (CBTST): comparison of digital breast tomosynthesis plus digital mammography to digital mammography alone Cristina Pulido‑Carmona 1,2,3* , Sara Romero‑Martín 1,2,3, José Luis Raya‑Povedano 1,2,3, María Cara‑García1,2,3, Pilar Font‑Ugalde1,3,4, Esperanza Elías‑Cabot 1,2,3, Margarita Pedrosa‑Garriguet 1,2,3 and Marina Álvarez‑Benito1,2,3 Abstract Purpose This work aims to compare the interval cancer rate and interval cancer characteristics between women screened with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) +digital mammography (DM) and those screened with DM alone. Methods The interval cancer rate and interval cancer characteristics of the study population included in the Cór‑ doba Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial (CBTST) were compared to a contemporary control population screened with DM. The tumour characteristics of screen‑detected and interval cancers were also compared. Contingency tables were used to compare interval cancer rates. The chi‑square test and Fisher’s exact test were used to compare the qualitative characteristics of the cancers whereas Student’s t test and the Mann–Whitney U test were used to ana‑ lyse quantitative features. Results A total of 16,068 screening exams with DBT + DM were conducted within the CBTST (mean age 57.59 ± 5.9 [SD]) between January 2015 and December 2016 (study population) . In parallel, 23,787 women (mean age 58.89 ± 5.9 standard deviation [SD]) were screened with DM (control population) . The interval cancer rate was lower in the study population than in the control population (15 [0 . 93‰; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0 . 73, 1. 14] vs 43 [1 . 8‰; 95% CI: 1. 58, 2 . 04] respectively; p = 0 . 045) . The difference in rate was more marked in women with dense breasts (0 . 95‰ in the study population vs 3. 17‰ in the control population; p = 0 . 031) . Interval cancers were smaller in the study population than in the control population (p = 0 . 031) . Conclusions The interval cancer rate was lower in women screened with DBT + DM compared to those screened with DM alone. These differences were more pronounced in women with dense breasts. Clinical relevance statement Women screened using tomosynthesis and digital mammography had a lower rate of interval cancer than women screened with digital mammography, with the greatest difference in the interval can‑ cer rate observed in women with dense breasts. *Correspondence: Cristina Pulido‑Carmona [kris_fn@hotmail.com](kris_fn@hotmail.com) Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © The Author(s) 2024. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.)[.](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.) 5428 Pulido‑Carmona et al. European Radiology (2024) 34:5427-5438 Key Points • The interval cancer rate was lower in the study population (digital breast tomosynthesis [DBT] +digital mammography [DM]) than in the control population (DM). • The differe

FAQs

What is the primary comparison in the CBTST interval cancer study?

The study compares interval cancer rate and interval cancer characteristics between women screened with digital breast tomosynthesis plus digital mammography and women screened with digital mammography alone.

How was the interval cancer rate analyzed between the DBT+DM and DM-only groups?

Interval cancer rates were compared using contingency tables, with chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests for qualitative cancer characteristics.

What subgroup showed a more pronounced difference in interval cancer outcomes?

Women with dense breasts showed the greatest difference, with a lower interval cancer rate in the DBT+DM study population compared with the DM-only control population.

Sep 21, 2026

Uploaded by Maeve