Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

M Rosselli Del Turco

Publications and source records attributed to M Rosselli Del Turco.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Minority report - false negative breast assessment in women recalled for suspicious screening mammography: imaging and pathological features, and associated delay in diagnosis.

AIM: We studied imaging, pathology and diagnostic aspects of false negative assessment (FNA) in women recalled for suspicious screening mammography. METHOD: Subjects were women aged 50-69 years undergoing biennial screening mammography within the Florence District screening programme from January 1992-December 2001 (339,953 consecutive screens). We identified all cancers occurring in women recalled to assessment and ascertained, and reviewed, all cases considered as negative on assessment and subsequently diagnosed with breast cancer. We compared imaging features, tumour histology and stage, and diagnostic testing on assessment for all women with cancer, and presentation and length of delay in women falsely negative on assessment. RESULTS: Eleven thousand six hundred and twenty four women were recalled to diagnostic assessment (recall rate = 3.4%) predominantly for suspicious mammography (9,216 positive screens). Breast cancer was missed in 57 cases: a FNA rate of 0.50% (0.37-0.62%) and comprising 4.1% (3.0-5.1%) of cancers occurring in women recalled after a positive screen. Two types of abnormalities were significantly more frequent in FNA cases than cancers detected at assessment: mass with regular borders (21.1 vs. 5.6%, p = 10(-5)), and asymmetrical density (22.8 vs. 5.4%, p = 10(-5)). On review 56% of FNAs were benign or probably benign BI-RADS categories. FNA occurred in 1.4% of early recalls and in 0.4% of initial assessment (p=0.0001). Significantly fewer tests were performed when assessing missed cancers than detected cancers with the most significant difference noted for FNAC (29.8 vs. 96.0%, p=10(-6)); mammography as the only evaluation on assessment was more frequent in missed cancers (31.5% vs 0.2%, p = 10(-6)). The 57 missed cases were subsequently diagnosed at early recall (2 cases), next biennial screen (11 cases), or as interval breast cancers (44 cases) with a mean delay in diagnosis of 628 days. Tumour histology, size and nodal status did not significantly differ between cancers missed and cancers diagnosed on assessment. CONCLUSION: False negatives on assessment represent a minority group in whom screening has failed. They might be reduced by adopting a more intensive diagnostic approach to assessment. Although there was no evidence of a worse prognosis in cancers missed at assessment, the delay in diagnosis is substantial and may impact long-term outcomes.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Analysis of the results of a proficiency test in screening mammography at the CSPO of Florence: review of 705 tests.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of a sample of Italian radiologists undergoing a proficiency test of screening mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analysed the results of 705 tests (537 first tests, 168 repeat tests) taken during 1997-2005 by 537 Italian radiologists. The test, consisting of 17 screen-detected cancer cases and 133 negative controls, was validated by a panel of expert readers defining a minimum standard as to sensitivity for cancer and recall rate of negative controls. Success rates were assessed as a function of previous experience in mammography (years of experience, total mammograms read, mammograms read in the last year). RESULTS: A total of 176 radiologists successfully passed the test at their first attempt (32.7%). Success correlated with experience, measured in terms of years of experience (5-year cutoff: chi(2) for trend=4.17, p=0.04), total mammograms read (chi(2) for trend =11.8, p=0.002) or mammograms read in the last year (chi(2) for trend=6.27, p=0.04). Training improves performance at repeat testing: after a first negative attempt, a second attempt was successful in 50.6% of cases (74/146) and a third in 68.1% (15/22). CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of Italian radiologists taking the test showed limited proficiency in screening mammography. This finding is consistent with several reports of poor performance of service screening compared with reference standards. As expected, test performance is associated with experience, suggesting that the current policy of employing non-dedicated, untrained, general radiologists in screening should be reconsidered. Test performance improves with training (courses, consultation of teaching atlases). Several screening programmes in Italy have been implemented without prior adequate radiologist training. Radiologist training needs to be considered a priority, at least in those screening programmes that are still to be implemented in one third of the country.

Aged↗
PubMed2005

Computer-aided detection (CAD) of cancers detected on double reading by one reader only.

We evaluated the role of computer-aided detection (CAD) in cancers undergoing double reading and detected by one reader only. A series of 33 cancers, originally missed by the first reader and detected by the second reader, and 75 negative controls were processed to assess CAD sensitivity, and was read by the six radiologists who originally missed the cancers with the help of CAD printouts. CAD case-based sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value were 51.5%, 18.6% and 21.7%, respectively. Average sensitivity of all radiologists in all cancers in the series was 74.7%, being higher for CAD+ (86.2%) than for CAD- (62.5%) cancers (P<0.01). When reading cancer cases that they had originally missed, radiologists had a sensitivity of 75.8%, which was higher for CAD+ (100.0%) than for CAD- (58.3%) cancers. The average recall rate was 14.2%, the majority of recalls (45 out of 64) occurring for lesions marked by CAD. CAD may help in detecting at most half of cancers missed at a single reading but detected by a second reader.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed2005

Second reading of screening mammograms increases cancer detection and recall rates. Results in the Florence screening programme.

OBJECTIVE: To assess double reading effectiveness in mammography screening. DESIGN: Retrospective study of 177,631 consecutive mammograms double read during 1998-2003. SETTING: The Florence screening programme, involving 11 trained radiologists. Abnormalities reported by at least one reader prompted assessment. RESULTS: The referral rate was 2.89% for the first reader, 3.15% for the second reader, and 3.59% for either reader. Of 713 total cancers detected, 43 were suspected only by the second reader (6.4% relative, 0.024% increase in absolute detection rate) and had a lower stage compared to the first reader (pTis-pT1b = 65.7 versus 52.0%): 41 were reviewed and classified (error type) as "minimal sign" in six, and "screening error" in 35 cases, or as BI-RADS 3 in one, 4a in 20, 4b in 13, and 4c in three cases. The second reading cost was 2.70 per woman examined, or 11,168 per additional cancer detected (versus 11,585 at a single reading). DISCUSSION: Second reading is effective in detecting a limited number of additional cancer cases. Tumour stage (one-third over 1 cm in diameter) and review findings (high rate of "screening errors" and BI-RADS R4b-c categories) suggest that second reading detects small "difficult cases" as well as larger cancers missed due to fatigue or loss of attention. Second reading reduces screening specificity to a minor extent, and since cancer detection at second reading seems cost-effective the procedure is recommendable in routine practice.

Aged↗
PubMed2005

The role of arbitration of discordant reports at double reading of screening mammograms.

OBJECTIVE: To asses the effectiveness of arbitration of discordant double readings in mammography screening. DESIGN: A retrospective study of 1217 consecutive arbitrations. SETTING: A subset of discordant double readings from the Florence screening programme underwent arbitration by a third reader. RESULTS: Positive arbitration of 1217 discordant double readings prompted assessment in 476 cases (39.2%), detecting 30 cancers (6.3%). Of 741 negative arbitrations (60.8%), 311 have been followed up thus far, and two cancers (0.64%) occurred in the site previously suspected at one of the two independent readings. Arbitration had a sensitivity of 86.3% and a negative predictive value of 99.3%. Arbitration reduced the overall referral rates from 3.82% to 2.59% (relative decrease 32.1%). Due to false-negative arbitration, cancers detected per 1000 women screened would decrease from 4.58 to 4.50 (relative decrease 1.7%). For every cancer missed due to false-negative arbitration, 151 unnecessary recalls and 21,248 euro would have been saved, whereas the saved cost per screened woman due to arbitration was 1.72 euro. DISCUSSION: Arbitration of discordant double reading would substantially reduce referral rates with a limited reduction in cancer detection rate, and may be recommended as a routine procedure. Greater benefit from arbitration might be expected in the presence of high referral rates at independent double reading, a common scenario in a newly implemented service screening.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed2003

Comparison of standard and double reading and computer-aided detection (CAD) of interval cancers at prior negative screening mammograms: blind review.

The study evaluates the role of computer-aided detection (CAD) in improving the detection of interval cancers as compared to conventional single (CONV) or double reading (DOUBLE). With this purpose, a set of 89 negative cases was seeded with 31 mammograms reported as negative and developing interval cancer in the following 2-year interval (false negative (FN)=11, minimal signs (MS)=20). A total of radiologists read the set with CONV and then with CAD. Overall, there were 589 cancer and 1691 noncancer readings with both CONV and CAD. Double reading was simulated by combining conventional readings in all 171 possible combinations of 19 radiologists, resulting in a total of 5301 cancer and 15 219 noncancer readings. Conventional single, DOUBLE and CAD readings were compared in terms of sensitivity and recall rate. Considering all 19 readings, cancer was identified in 190 or 248 of 589 readings (32.2 vs 42.1%, chi(2)=11.80, df=1, P<0.01) and recalls were 287 or 405 of 1691 readings (16.9 vs 23.9%, chi(2)=24.87, df=1, P<0.01) at CONV or CAD, respectively. When considering FN and MS cases separately, sensitivity at CONV or CAD was 50.2 or 62.6% (chi(2)=6.98, df=1, P=0.01) for FN and 22.3 or 30.7% (chi(2)=6.47, df=1, P=0.01) for MS cases, respectively. Computer-aided detection (average of 19 readings) was slightly and not significantly less sensitive (sensitivity: 42.1 vs 46.1%, chi(2)=3.24, df=1, P=0.07) but more specific (recall rate 23.9 vs 26.1%, chi(2)=3.8, df=1, P=0.04) as compared to DOUBLE (average of 171 readings). Average sensitivity for FN cases only was 62.6% for CAD and 64.8% for DOUBLE (chi(2)=0.32, df=1, P=0.58). Corresponding values for MS cases were 30.7% for CAD and 35.7% for DOUBLE (chi(2)=3.53, df=1, P=0.06). Compared to CONV, CAD allowed for improved sensitivity, though with reduced specificity, both effects being statistically significant. Computer-aided detection was almost as sensitive as DOUBLE but significantly more specific. Computer-aided detection might be used in the current practice to improve sensitivity of conventional single reading. Based on estimates of screening sensitivity and FN/MS interval cancer expected frequency, the absolute increase of screening sensitivity expected by introducing CAD-assisted reading may be estimated around 0.9%. The use of CAD as a possible surrogate to conventional DOUBLE needs to be confirmed by further studies, which should include a cost-effective analysis.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed1999

Proficiency test for screening mammography: results for 117 volunteer Italian radiologists.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the performance of a large sample of Italian radiologists undergoing a proficiency test for screening mammography. DESIGN: Evaluation of performance indicators according to reference standards determined by a panel of experts (sensitivity (reference standard > or = 80%), recall rate (reference standard < or = 15%)). SETTING: 117 Italian radiologists of varying experience (years of practice 0.5-18, average 5.9; mammograms read 500-51,000, average 13,000), all currently reporting clinical mammography and planning to take part in screening in the near future. RESULTS: Eighty four of 117 (72%) radiologists reached the standard for sensitivity, 88 (75%) reached the standard for recall rate, and only 59 (50%) reached both standards and passed the proficiency test. The probability of passing the test was significantly correlated with mammographic practice (p = 0.015), mammograms read (p = 0.024), and mammograms read/year (p = 0.043). DISCUSSION: The performance of a large sample of Italian radiologists currently reporting clinical mammography was disappointing, indicating the need for proper training of at least 50% of the tested subjects. When implementing organised screening the health authority should set up a proper process for training and accrediting radiologists, and a proficiency test should be part of such a process.

Chi-Square Distribution↗
PubMed1997

Solid nonpalpable breast lesions. Success and failure of guided fine-needle aspiration cytology in a consecutive series of 2444 cases.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the contribution of guided fine-needle aspiration cytology in reducing unnecessary biopsies of benign solid nonpalpable breast lesions with low suspicion of malignancy at mammography. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An evaluation was made of a consecutive series of 2444 solid nonpalpable breast lesions detected by mammography and undergoing guided (sonography or stereotaxy) fine-needle aspiration cytology. Surgical biopsy was made in the presence of strong suspicion of malignancy at mammography and/or of abnormal cytology. RESULTS: The sensitivity was 96.7% and the specificity 77.7% (average follow-up 2.77 years). False-negative/inadequate cytology associated with low suspicion of malignancy at mammography resulted in a diagnostic delay in 27 cancer cases (invasive 20, intraductal 7). On the other hand, cytology led to surgical biopsy in 53 cancer cases which might not otherwise have been biopsied because of low radiological suspicion of cancer. Surgical biopsy of all cases, to avoid diagnostic delays, would have increased the benign biopsy rate by a factor of 4.5, with a rise in the benign: malignant biopsy ratio from 0.44:1 to 1.93:1. CONCLUSION: Stereotaxy- or ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology of nonpalpable mammographic abnormalities can achieve a sharp reduction in unnecessary benign biopsies in cases of low suspicion of malignancy at mammography.

Biopsy, Needle↗
PubMed1996

Reproducibility of histological diagnosis of breast lesions: results of a panel in Italy.

Sixteen pathologists independently examined and classified a series of 81 breast lesions selected from the files of several Italian Pathology Departments in the context of a national task force on breast cancer (FONCAM). A four category classification system was used for analysis; according to the majority diagnosis (MD), simply defined as the most frequently reported in the panel, the series included 37 benign lesions without atypia (45.7%), nine atypical hyperplasias (11.1%), 18 in situ (22.2%) and 17 invasive carcinomas (21.0%). Concordance, estimated for all possible pair-wise comparisons between pathologists, was good (mean kappa value: 0.59). A comparison between the diagnoses of each pathologist and the panel majority diagnosis was also made. Overall, a global kappa value of 0.72 was found (range 0.57-0.85), with category-specific values being excellent for invasive carcinoma (0.89) and benign lesions without atypia (0.77), relatively good for in situ carcinoma (0.69) but poor for atypical hyperplasia (0.38). These results confirm that quality assurance procedures are particularly indicated for large screening programmes for breast cancer, and suggest that for atypical lesions strict diagnostic criteria should be adopted.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed1996

[The procedures and results of a quality control program in mammography carried out on a regional basis].

In 1990 the region of Tuscany instituted a quality control program for mammography, in order to check the working conditions of mammography centers in the region, to investigate the feasibility of applying some working standards in line with European recommendations, and to promote the training of personnel. The program involves the following: a test of newly acquired mammographic equipment to establish that it meets the required standards; an annual test of generators, X-ray beams, grid, AEC, screen-film system, film processing, dose and image quality; daily test (phantom radiography and film sensitometry) performed by the personnel of each mammographic Unit; and a sustained advisory service for the technical problems occurring between checks. Thirty-nine of 57 centers participated on a voluntary basis, and 135 checks were performed annually. The results of the program show a performance below the recommended standard in relation to AEC, film sensitometry and the adequacy of lights in dark rooms in 40%, 50% and 63%, respectively, of the centers. Entrance exposure was over 1500 mR, with a maximum value of 3450 mR, in 6 cases in the first round. 5 cases in second, and only 1 case in the third. In general, the results are slightly improving, but mammography optimization is still a long way off. It is necessary to carry out suitable programs for quality control in mammography on a regional basis and to establish precise guidelines for individual mammographic Units to follow in order to meet the European standards.

Breast↗
PubMed1996

[Test for the assessment of the diagnostic accuracy of mammography. Results of 103 tests carried out by Italian radiologists].

This study reports the results of some voluntary Italian radiologists performing 103 proficiency tests in clinical (100 patients, 32 cancers) and screening mammography (150 patients, 17 cancers). Relative to the average accuracy of a panel of expert radiologists, 12 of 49 readers (27%) and 32 of 54 readers (56%) passed the clinical and screening mammography test, respectively. The results were significantly correlated with the readers' previous experience (years of mammographic practice [< 2, 2-4, > 4] and number of mammograms read [< 5,000, 5-10,000, > 10,000]). The rate of passed test was: < 2 years = 0%, 2-4 years = 40%, > 4 years = 66.6% (P = 0.002); < 5,000 mammograms read = 15.3%, 5-10,000 = 28.5%, > 10,000 = 69.2% (P = 0.02). The best results were achieved by the readers with a previous reading experience of at least 10,000 mammograms, a figure which might be used as the reference for a future criterion of accreditation on a national basis. Proper training before reporting mammography is fundamental to ensure a good diagnostic performance. The low number of tests performed in most Italian mammographic practice facilities makes local training highly questionable and requires quite a long time. Reference centers, adequately equipped for training, should be identified for this purpose. Proficiency tests such as those described in the present study are useful to assess individual performance and should be a part of a training program.

Breast Diseases↗
PubMed1995

The detectability of breast cancer by screening mammography.

We reviewed 134 patients with breast cancer (screen detected = 85, interval = 49) who had been reported as negative at previous mammographic screening in the Florence District Programme. At prior mammograms review, 12% of the cases were classified as 'screening error' (suspicious signs missed owing to misperception or poor imaging technique), 26% as 'minimal signs present', 54% as 'radiographically occult' and 7% as 'radiographically occult at diagnosis'. These results are quite consistent with those recently reported for the Nijmegen screening programme. Screening errors may be reduced either by reducing the risk of misperception (double reading) or by improving imaging quality, but this would achieve earlier detection in a minority of cancer cases. Minimal signs of cancer were present 2 years before the diagnosis in over one-third of screen-detected cancers. Increasing screening frequency (from biennial to annual) may advance detection time of most 'screening errors' and of some cancers in the 'minimal signs present' and 'mammographically occult' categories, but this would almost double screening costs, and the benefit would probably be inferior to that obtained by doubling the population invited to biennial screening. Adopting less stringent criteria for referral to diagnostic assessment would probably lead to the detection of some cases in the 'minimal signs present' category. This seems to us a more convenient policy to adopt to advance cancer detection time, although it will also sharply increase referral rates and costs. As diagnostic assessment of minimal lesions is far from being 100% accurate, this policy would also considerably increase the frequency of unnecessary benign biopsies. All these negative effects might turn out to be unacceptable.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

[Diagnostic framework of nonpalpable lesions of the breast].

Mammography is the most sensitive test for non-palpable lesions, but its specificity is quite limited. When a decision for biopsy is based only on the mammographic appearance the benign/malignant biopsy ratio (B/M) is around 3:1. The B/M varies according to the radiological pattern being favourable for stellate opacities, high for regular opacities, and intermediate for distortions and microcalcifications. Aspiration cytology of non-palpable lesions, either sonographically or stereotaxically guided, is highly accurate. When the decision for surgical biopsy is taken also on the basis of cytology, B/M may be reduced by up to 0.5:1. As false negatives are expected for cytology, lesions which are strongly suspicious at mammography must be biopsied anyway. Sonography guided aspiration is possible in about a half of mammographically detected non-palpable lesions, particularly for opacities, whereas distortions and microcalcification are seldom visualized at sonography. Cytology should be routinely performed in the presence of questionable non-palpable lesions.

Aged↗
PubMed1994

Intensive diagnostic follow-up after treatment of primary breast cancer. A randomized trial. National Research Council Project on Breast Cancer follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of early detection of intrathoracic and bone metastases in reducing mortality in breast cancer patients. DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial allocating breast cancer patients to two alternative follow-up protocols (intensive vs clinical) for at least 5 years. SETTING: Twelve breast clinics (referral centers) in different areas in Italy. PATIENTS: A total of 1243 consecutive patients (either premenopausal or postmenopausal) surgically treated for unilateral invasive breast carcinoma with no evidence of metastases. The two study groups were well balanced in terms of clinical and prognostic characteristics. INTERVENTION: Patients in both treatment groups had physical examination and mammography, while patients of the intensive follow-up group had, in addition, chest roentgenography and bone scan every 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Vital status at 5 years was the main outcome; information was available for all except five patients (0.4%). Relapse-free survival was also analyzed. RESULTS: Overall, 393 recurrences (104 local and 289 distant) were observed during the study. Increased detection of isolated intrathoracic and bone metastases was evident in the intensive follow-up group compared with the clinical follow-up group (112 vs 71 cases), while no difference was observed for other sites and for local and/or regional recurrences. The 5-year relapse-free survival rate was significantly higher for the clinical follow-up group, with patients in the intensive follow-up group showing earlier detection of recurrences. No difference in 5-year overall mortality (18.6% vs 19.5%) was observed between the two follow-up groups. CONCLUSIONS: Periodic chest roentgenography and bone scan allow earlier detection of distant metastases, but anticipated diagnosis appears to be the only effect of intensive follow-up, and no impact on prognosis is evident after 5 years. Periodic intensive follow-up with chest roentgenography and bone scan should not be recommended as a routine policy.

Adult↗