Digital Tomosynthesis Mammography and Digital Mammography in Screening Patients for Breast Cancer

Titre officiel

Tomosynthesis Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (TMIST)

Sommaire:

Cet essai de phase III à répartition aléatoire porte sur la mammographie tomosynthèse numérique et la mammographie numérique pour le dépistage du cancer du sein chez les patients. Le dépistage du cancer du sein à l’aide de la mammographie tomosynthèse numérique pourrait s’avérer supérieur au dépistage à l’aide de la mammographie numérique et réduire la nécessité d’obtenir des images supplémentaires ou d’administrer un traitement.

Description de l'essai

Primary Outcome:

  • Proportion of women diagnosed with an advanced breast cancer at any time during a period of 4.5 years from randomization, including the period of active screening and a period of follow up after the last screen
Secondary Outcome:
  • Agreement between local and expert study pathologists for all breast lesions (benign and malignant) biopsied during the five years of screening
  • Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) imaging features
  • Breast-cancer-specific mortality
  • Centralized quality control (QC) monitoring program implementation
  • Diagnostic and predictive performance of tomosynthesis mammography (TM) and digital mammography (DM) [AUC]
  • Assess the predictive performance of tomosynthesis mammography (TM) and digital mammography (DM)
  • Health care costs (including diagnostic procedures and cancer care received) as the result of an episode of breast cancer screening by tomosynthesis mammography (TM) versus digital mammography (DM)
  • Health care utilization (including cancer care received) of an episode of breast cancer screening by tomosynthesis mammography (TM) versus digital mammography (DM)
  • Histologically malignant (true positive cases) and benign lesions (false positive cases)
  • Prevalence of breast cancer subtypes (luminal A, luminal B, HER2+, basal-like) and p53 signature in the two arms
  • Proportion of women diagnosed with an ?advanced? breast cancer in the two arms
  • Quality control (QC) tests useful for determination of image quality and those that are predictive of device failure
  • Rate of interval cancers
  • Recall rates
  • Biopsy rates
  • Task-based measure of image quality
  • Variability of quality control parameters
PRIMARY OBJECTIVES:
  • To compare the proportions of participants in the tomosynthesis mammography (TM) and digital mammography (DM) study arms experiencing the occurrence of an ?advanced? breast cancer at any time during a period of 4.5 years from randomization, including the period of active screening and a period of clinical follow-up after the last screen (T4).
SECONDARY OBJECTIVES:
  • To assess the potential effect of age, menopausal and hormonal status, breast density, and family cancer history on the primary endpoint difference between the two arms.
  • To compare the diagnostic performance of TM and DM, as measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV).
  • To compare the recall rates and biopsy rates for TM versus DM, with subset analyses by the same variables as listed in aim II.
  • To compare the rate of interval cancers for TM and DM and to assess the mechanism of diagnosis for these interval cancers with categorization by symptomatic versus (vs) asymptomatic, and how detected: diagnosed via physical examination, mammography, ultrasound (US), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or other technologies.
  • To examine the correlation between Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) imaging features and histologic and genetic features, such as invasive ductal and invasive lobular histology, high grade, high stage at diagnosis, and aggressive genetic subtypes.
  • To assess different combinations of TM and synthesized 2 dimensional (2D) or DM in reader studies to assist in determining the optimum balance between diagnostic performance, radiation exposure and technique.
  • To estimate and compare breast-cancer-specific mortality between the two study arms.
  • To estimate and compare the prevalence of breast cancer subtypes (luminal A, luminal B, HER2+, basal-like) low, medium or high proliferation via PAM50 proliferation signatures, and p53 mutant-like or wild-type-like according to a validated p53 dependent signature in the two arms, overall and stratified on whether cancers were detected through screening or as interval cancers, and whether cancers were invasive or in situ.
  • To classify histologically malignant (true positive cases) and benign lesions (false positive cases) as normal-like or tumour-like using the PAM50 gene expression assay subtype (luminal A, luminal B, HER2, basal-like,), and low, medium, or high proliferation according to PAM50 proliferation signatures, and p53 mutant-like or wild-type-like according to a validated p53-dependent signature.
  • To assess the agreement between local and expert study pathologists for all breast lesions (benign and malignant) biopsied during the 4.5 years of screening with TM or DM.
  • To create a blood and buccal cell biobank for future biomarker and genetic testing.
  • To compare health care utilization (including cancer care received) and cost of an episode of breast cancer screening by TM versus DM, overall and within subsets.
  • To implement a centralized quality control (QC) monitoring program for both 2D digital mammography (DM) and tomosynthesis (TM), which provides rapid feedback on image quality, using quantitative tools, taking advantage of the automated analysis of digital images.
  • To assess temporal and site-to site variations in image quality, breast radiation dose, and other quality control parameters in TM vs. DM.
  • To refine and implement task-based measures of image quality to assess the effects of technical parameters, including machine type, and detector spatial and contrast resolution on measures of diagnostic accuracy for TM.
  • To evaluate which QC tests are useful for determination of image quality and those that are predictive of device failure, in order to recommend an optimal QC program for TM.
OUTLINE:
Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. ARM A: Patients undergo bilateral screening DM with standard craniocaudal (CC) and mediolateral oblique (MLO) views at baseline, 12, 24, 36, and 48 months if pre-menopausal or at baseline, 24, and 48 months if post-menopausal. ARM B: Patients undergo manufacturer-defined screening TM at baseline, 12, 24, 36, and 48 months if pre-menopausal or at baseline, 24, and 48 months if post-menopausal. After completion of study, patients are followed up for at least 4.5-8 years after study entry.

Voir cet essai sur ClinicalTrials.gov

Intéressé(e) par cet essai?

Imprimez cette page et apportez-la chez votre médecin pour discuter de votre admissibilité à cet essai et des options de traitement. Seul votre médecin peut vous recommander pour un essai clinique.

Ressources

Société canadienne du cancer

Ces ressources sont fournies en partenariat avec Société canadienne du cancer