%0 Journal Article
%T Digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer diagnosis in women with dense breasts and additional breast cancer risk factors: A systematic review.
%A Raichand S
%A Blaya-Novakova V
%A Berber S
%A Livingstone A
%A Noguchi N
%A Houssami N
%J Breast
%V 77
%N 0
%D 2024 Jul 6
%M 38996609
%F 4.254
%R 10.1016/j.breast.2024.103767
%X <B>BACKGROUND: </B>Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) may improve sensitivity in population screening. However, evidence is currently limited on the performance of DBT in patients at a higher risk of breast cancer. This systematic review compares the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of DBT, digital mammography (DM), and ultrasound, for breast cancer detection in women with dense breasts and additional risk factors.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>Medline, Embase, and Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews via OvidSP were searched to identify literature from 2010 to August 21, 2023. Selection of studies, data extraction, and quality assessment (using QUADAS-2 and CHEERS) were completed in duplicate. Findings were summarised descriptively and narratively.<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>Twenty-six studies met pre-specified inclusion criteria. In women with breast symptoms or recalled for investigation of screen-detected findings (19 studies), DBT may be more accurate than DM. For example, in symptomatic women, the sensitivity of DBT + DM ranged from 82.8 % to 92.5 % versus 56.8 %-81.3 % for mammography (DM/synthesised images). However, most studies had a high risk of bias due to participant selection. Evidence regarding DBT in women with a personal or family history of breast cancer, for DBT versus ultrasound alone, and cost-effectiveness of DBT was limited.<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>In women with dense breasts and additional risk factors for breast cancer, evidence is limited about the accuracy of DBT compared to other imaging modalities, particularly in those with personal or family history of breast cancer. Future research in this population should consider head-to-head comparisons of imaging modalities to determine the relative effectiveness of these imaging tests.<BR><B>BACKGROUND: </B>PROSPERO registration number CRD42021236470.