Jacky Luiten

Recall and outcome of screen‐detected microcalcifications of mammography screening | 73 5 Table 5.2 Trends in recall and workup of suspicious calcifications at screening mammography. Screening year 97/98 99/00 01/02 03/04 05‐06 07/08 09/10 11/12 13/14 15/16 Total Screens 48,721 53,718 53,489 61,251 66,300 67,530 90,128 113,335 131,427 131,757 817,656 Calcification recall, (%) 51 (0.1) 68 (0.1) 77 (0.1) 213 (0.3) 165 (0.2) 167 (0.2) 653 (0.7) 761 (0.7) 721 (0.5) 680 (0.5) 3,556 (0.4) Initial 17 22 15 43 32 37 148 209 224 179 926 Initial % [95CI] $ 0.2 [0.1‐0.3] 0.2 [0.1‐0.3] 0.2 [0.1‐0.3] 0.6 [0.4‐0.8] 0.5 [0.3‐0.7] 0.5 [0.4‐0.7] 1.5 [1.2‐1.7] 1.6 [1.4‐1.8] 1.6 [1.4‐1.8] 1.3 [1.1‐1.4] 0.9 [0.9‐1.0] Subsequent 34 46 62 170 133 130 505 552 497 501 2,630 Subsequent % [95CI] # 0.1 [0.1‐0.1] 0.1 [0.1‐0.1] 0.1 [0.1‐0.2] 0.3 [0.3‐0.4] 0.2 [0.2‐0.3] 0.2 [0.2‐0.3] 0.6 [0.6‐0.7] 0.5 [0.5‐0.6] 0.4 [0.4‐0.5] 0.4 [0.4‐0.5] 0.4 [0.4‐0.4] Pre‐operative assessment of recalled calcifications None Additional imaging^ Additional imaging and biopsy FNAC CNB SCNB Surgical biopsy BI‐RADS* 1 2 3 4 5 Unknown 0 32 (62.7) 2 (3.9) 0 0 17 (33.3) N/A 0 48 (70.6) 0 4 (5.9) 5 (7.4) 11 (16.2) N/A 1 (1.3) 21 (27.3) 4 (5.2) 3 (3.9) 26 (33.8) 22 (28.6) 0 7 (9.1) 9 (11.7) 52 (67.5) 9 (11.7) 0 0 39 (18.3) 8 (3.8) 16 (7.5) 126 (59.2) 24 (11.3) 1 (0.5) 18 (8.5) 46 (21.6) 143 (67.1) 5 (2.3) 0 1 (0.6) 29 (17.6) 4 (2.4) 9 (5.5) 117 (70.9) 5 (3.0) 1 (0.6) 16 (9.7) 40 (24.2) 97 (58.8) 9 (5.5) 2 (1.2) 1 (0.6) 26 (15.6) 2 (1.2) 16 (9.6) 113(67.7) 9 (5.4) 3 (1.8) 15 (9.0) 42 (25.1) 94 (56.3) 11 (6.6) 2 (1.2) 2 (0.3) 117 (17.9) 5 (0.8) 47 (7.2) 474 (72.6) 8 (1.2) 5 (0.8) 74 (11.3) 141 (21.6) 413 (63.2) 15 (2.3) 5 (0.8) 2 (0.3) 151 (19.8) 2 (0.3) 45 (5.9) 542 (71.2) 19 (2.5) 8 (1.1) 92 (12.1) 144 (18.9) 506 (66.5) 8 (1.1) 3 (0.4) 4 (0.6) 85 (11.8) 1 (0.1) 56 (7.8) 553 (76.7) 22 (3.1) 0 54 (7.5) 111 (15.4) 538 (74.6) 13 (1.8) 5 (0.7) 0 69 (10.1) 0 57 (8.4) 528 (77.6) 26 (3.8) 2 (0.3) 38 (5.6) 53 (7.8) 562 (82.6) 20 (2.9) 5 (0.7) 11 (0.3) 617 (17.4) 28 (0.8) 253 (7.1) 2,484(69.8) 163 (4.6) $ Because these initial screenings involve all different women, the intervals are correct (95% coverage); # Because of dependence between repeat screenings, these interval are not entirely correct, but likely conservative (i.e., actual variance is smaller). As data could not be retrieved per woman per repeat screen (anonymous data base), full correlations cannot be modelled and estimated; ^Additional mammographic views, breast tomosynthesis, (3D) breast ultrasonography, breast MRI or a combination of these modalities. * BI‐RADS classification routinely available since 2001. FNAC = fine needle aspiration cytology; (S)CNB = (stereotactic) core needle biopsy. DCIS = ductal carcinoma in‐situ. BI‐RADS = Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. N/A = not available.