Concordance of breast imaging reporting and data system assessments and management recommendations in screening mammography

Stephen H. Taplin, Laura E. Ichikawa, Karla Kerlikowske, Virginia L. Ernster, Robert D. Rosenberg, Bonnie C. Yankaskas, Patricia A. Carney, Berta M. Geller, Nicole Urban, Mark B. Dignan, William E. Barlow, Rachel Ballard-Barbash, Edward A. Sickles

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

105 Scopus citations

Abstract

PURPOSE: To examine how frequently Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) mammographic screening assessments were associated with expected clinical management recommendations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium mammography registries recorded screening assessments and recommendations in 1997 to identify the proportion of women in each BI-RADS category. The first screening assessment for a woman without cancer or a prior mammogram within 9 months was associated with its independently recorded recommendation. RESULTS: Among 292,795 women, screening assessments included 269,022 (91.9%) with a "negative" or "benign finding," and 267,103 (99.3%) of these women were recommended for normal interval follow-up. Among 11,861 (4.1%) women with screening assessments of "probably benign finding," 4,782 (40.3%) were recommended for short interval follow-up as expected on the basis of the BI-RADS, but a high proportion (36.9%) were recommended for additional imaging. Among 1,625 (0.6%) women with "suspicious abnormality," most were recommended for biopsy (48.7%) or clinical examination and/or surgical consult (9.0%), but many were recommended for additional imaging (38.7%). Among 243 (0.1%) women with screening assessments "highly suggestive of malignancy," a majority were recommended for biopsy (73.3%) or clinical examination and/or surgical consult (18.1%) consistent with BI-RADS, but some were recommended for additional imaging (6.6%). CONCLUSION: BI-RADS assessments and management recommendations are consistent for negative and benign assessments, but inconsistencies were found in assessments and recommendations for mammographic abnormalities.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)529-535
Number of pages7
JournalRADIOLOGY
Volume222
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2002

Keywords

  • Breast neoplasms, diagnosis
  • Breast radiography, quality assurance
  • Breast, ACR Reporting and Data System
  • Cancer screening

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Concordance of breast imaging reporting and data system assessments and management recommendations in screening mammography'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Taplin, S. H., Ichikawa, L. E., Kerlikowske, K., Ernster, V. L., Rosenberg, R. D., Yankaskas, B. C., Carney, P. A., Geller, B. M., Urban, N., Dignan, M. B., Barlow, W. E., Ballard-Barbash, R., & Sickles, E. A. (2002). Concordance of breast imaging reporting and data system assessments and management recommendations in screening mammography. RADIOLOGY, 222(2), 529-535. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2222010647