Skip to main content

Table 1 Comparative sensitivity of screening methods in women at increased risk for breast cancer

From: Imaging in breast cancer: Magnetic resonance imaging

Study site and reference Study design Follow-up, months Mean age, years (range) Cancers detected/screened, (%) Sensitivity (%) Cancer yield from MRI alone (%) [95% CI]a Biopsies recommended as a result of MRI, % PPV of biopsies performed on basis of MRI, %
      Mammography MRI Ultrasound    
Germany [19] P 12 39 (18–65) 4.7 (9/192) 33 (3/9) 100 (9/9) 33 (3/9) 6/192 (3.1) [0.9–6.0] 14/192 (7.3) 64
Canada [20] P 36 47 (26–65) 9.3 (22/236) 36 (8/22) 77 (17/22) 33 (7/21) 7/236 (3.0)d [1.7–7.1] 37/236 (15.7) 46
Italy [21] P 24 46 (25–77) 7.6 (8/105) 13 (1/8) 100 (8/8) 13 (1/8) 7/105 (6.7) [2.7–13.3] 9/105 (8.6) 89
Netherlands [22] P 12 42 (22–68) 2.8 (3/109) 0 100 (3/3) - 3/109 (2.8) [0.6–7.8] 5/109 (4.6) 60
United States [23] R None 50b (23–82) 3.8 (14/367) 0c 100 (14/14) - 14/367 (3.8) [2.1–6.3] 59/367 (15.8) 24
Netherlands [24] P 33 40 (19–72) 2.4 (45/1,909)e 40 (18/45) 71 (32/45) - 22/1,909 (1.2) [1.1–2.4] 56/1,909 (2.9) 57
International [25] P None 45 (26–86) 1.1 (4/367) 25(1/4) 100 (4/4) - 3/367 (0.8) [0.2–2.4] 23/367 (6.3) 17
  1. P, prospective; PPV, positive predictive value; R, retrospective. aExact binomial confidence intervals. bReported median. cTo be included in this study, subjects had to have a negative mammogram. dOne patient who had an MRI-only cancer in this study did not receive ultrasound. eComparable sensitivity reported on 45 of 51 cancers in this study.