{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,17]],"date-time":"2026-09-17T00:25:15Z","timestamp":1789604715785,"version":"build-2803163510"},"reference-count":39,"publisher":"American Medical Association (AMA)","issue":"7","content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["JAMA Oncol"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,7,1]]},"abstract":"Importance<\/jats:title>Evidence on screening outcomes with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) vs digital mammography (DM) in women with a family history of breast cancer is limited.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>Objective<\/jats:title>To compare the performance of DBT and DM screening in women with a family history of breast cancer overall and subdivided by breast cancer family history category, breast density, age group, screening interval, and screening round, and to describe characteristics of cancers detected on screening vs interval cancers.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>Design, Setting, and Participants<\/jats:title>In this comparative cohort study at imaging facilities affiliated with the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium, adult women 18 years and older with a self-reported family history of breast cancer who underwent DBT or DM from 2011 to 2018 were included, with a 1-year follow-up for breast carcinoma. Data analysis was performed between November 2023 and August 2024.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>Exposures<\/jats:title>DBT or DM.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>Main Outcomes and Measures<\/jats:title>The main outcomes were absolute risk difference (ARD) between DBT and DM for recall rate, cancer detection rate, interval cancer rate, advanced cancer rate, biopsy rate, positive predictive values, sensitivity, and specificity, with inverse probability of treatment weighting.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>Results<\/jats:title>A total of 208\u202f945 women with a family history of breast cancer undergoing 502\u202f357 screening examinations were included in the sample. Median (IQR) age was 58 (50-66) and 57 (49-66) years for the DBT and DM groups, respectively. Adjusted ARDs (DBT vs DM) were significant for recall rate (\u22121.51%; 95% CI, \u22122.42% to \u22120.59%) and specificity (1.56%; 95% CI, 0.65%-2.46%) in the overall cohort of 121\u202f698 DBT and 380\u202f561 DM examinations and among women with 1 first-degree relative (recall rate ARD, \u22121.72%; 95% CI, \u22122.70% to \u22120.74%; specificity ARD, 1.75%; 95% CI, 0.81%-2.69%). Among those with only second-degree relatives, the biopsy rate for DBT was significantly higher (ARD, 0.39%; 95% CI, 0.18%-0.61%). Significant ARDs were observed for the ductal carcinoma in situ detection rate (\u22120.71 per 1000 examinations; 95% CI, \u22121.03 to \u22120.38 per 1000 examinations) in women with almost entirely fatty breasts; recall rate (\u22121.90%; 95% CI, \u22122.88% to \u22120.92%) and specificity (1.93%; 95% CI, 0.97%-2.89%) in women with scattered fibroglandular densities. Significant ARDs were also observed for the positive predictive value for recall (1.75%; 95% CI, 0.84%-2.67%) in heterogeneously dense breasts, as well as the biopsy rate (0.48%; 95% CI, 0.16%-0.80%) and advanced cancer rate (\u22120.61 per 1000 examinations; 95% CI, \u22121.02 to \u22120.20 per 1000 examinations) in extremely dense breasts. DBT screening had a higher proportion than DM of screen-detected early-stage, invasive cancers with favorable prognostic characteristics.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>Conclusions and Relevance<\/jats:title>In this cohort study of women with a family history of breast cancer, DBT screening reduced recall rates and increased specificity compared to DM, particularly in women with 1 first-degree relative with breast cancer and those with scattered fibroglandular breast density, and reduced advanced cancer rates in women with extremely dense breasts.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1001\/jamaoncol.2025.1209","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2025,5,22]],"date-time":"2025-05-22T11:31:11Z","timestamp":1747913471000},"page":"742","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":8,"title":["Tomosynthesis vs Digital Mammography Screening in Women with a Family History of Breast Cancer"],"prefix":"10.1001","volume":"11","author":[{"given":"Tong","family":"Li","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Yu-Ru","family":"Su","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Janie M.","family":"Lee","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Radiology, University of Washington and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Ellen S.","family":"O\u2019Meara","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Diana L.","family":"Miglioretti","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Division of Biostatistics, Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Karla","family":"Kerlikowske","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco"},{"name":"Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Louise","family":"Henderson","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Nehmat","family":"Houssami","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia"},{"name":"School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"10","reference":[{"issue":"9","key":"coi250019r1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"571","DOI":"10.1097\/01.gim.0000237867.34011.12","article-title":"Population-based study of the prevalence of family history of cancer: implications for cancer screening and prevention.","volume":"8","author":"Ramsey","year":"2006","journal-title":"Genet Med"},{"issue":"7-8","key":"coi250019r2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"495","DOI":"10.1159\/000294469","article-title":"Prevalence of family history of breast, colorectal, prostate, and lung cancer in a population-based study.","volume":"13","author":"Mai","year":"2010","journal-title":"Public Health Genomics"},{"issue":"5","key":"coi250019r3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"800","DOI":"10.1002\/(SICI)1097-0215(19970529)71:5<800::AID-IJC18>3.0.CO;2-B","article-title":"Family history and the risk of breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","volume":"71","author":"Pharoah","year":"1997","journal-title":"Int J Cancer"},{"issue":"9291","key":"coi250019r4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1389","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(01)06524-2","article-title":"Familial breast cancer: collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 52 epidemiological studies including 58,209 women with breast cancer and 101,986 women without the disease.","volume":"358","author":"Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer","year":"2001","journal-title":"Lancet"},{"issue":"4","key":"coi250019r5","first-page":"621","article-title":"Mammographic density and breast cancer risk by family history in women of white and Asian ancestry.","volume":"26","author":"Maskarinec","year":"2015","journal-title":"Cancer Causes Control"},{"issue":"7","key":"coi250019r6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"556","DOI":"10.1093\/jnci\/95.7.556","article-title":"Mammographic breast density and family history of breast cancer.","volume":"95","author":"Ziv","year":"2003","journal-title":"J Natl Cancer Inst"},{"issue":"9","key":"coi250019r7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"942","DOI":"10.1093\/jnci\/djy121","article-title":"Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis or mammography: a meta-analysis of cancer detection and recall.","volume":"110","author":"Marinovich","year":"2018","journal-title":"J Natl Cancer Inst"},{"issue":"8","key":"coi250019r8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"785","DOI":"10.1080\/14737140.2018.1483243","article-title":"Digital breast tomosynthesis (3D mammography) for breast cancer screening and for assessment of screen-recalled findings: review of the evidence.","volume":"18","author":"Li","year":"2018","journal-title":"Expert Rev Anticancer Ther"},{"issue":"2","key":"coi250019r9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"56","DOI":"10.1002\/prm2.12068","article-title":"Performance of full-field digital mammography versus digital breast.","volume":"11","author":"Wang","year":"2022","journal-title":"Precis Med Sci"},{"issue":"1","key":"coi250019r10","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"44","DOI":"10.1186\/s43055-021-00421-4","article-title":"Comparing the diagnostic efficacy of digital breast tomosynthesis with full-field digital mammography using BI-RADS scoring.","volume":"52","author":"Naeim","year":"2021","journal-title":"Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med"},{"issue":"1","key":"coi250019r11","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"116","DOI":"10.1038\/s41416-022-01790-x","article-title":"Differential detection by breast density for digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography population screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","volume":"127","author":"Li","year":"2022","journal-title":"Br J Cancer"},{"issue":"2","key":"coi250019r12","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e103","DOI":"10.1016\/j.clbc.2024.09.013","article-title":"Performance of digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography in women with a family history of breast cancer: A systematic review.","volume":"25","author":"Li","year":"2025","journal-title":"Clin Breast Cancer"},{"issue":"6","key":"coi250019r14","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"938","DOI":"10.1158\/1055-9965.EPI-16-0801","article-title":"Family history of breast cancer, breast density, and breast cancer risk in a U.S. breast cancer screening population.","volume":"26","author":"Ahern","year":"2017","journal-title":"Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev"},{"issue":"7","key":"coi250019r15","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"779","DOI":"10.1200\/JCO.22.02470","article-title":"Extending the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium model of invasive breast cancer.","volume":"42","author":"Gard","year":"2024","journal-title":"J Clin Oncol"},{"issue":"22","key":"coi250019r17","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2220","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.2022.7672","article-title":"Association of screening with digital breast tomosynthesis vs digital mammography with risk of interval invasive and advanced breast cancer.","volume":"327","author":"Kerlikowske","year":"2022","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"issue":"4","key":"coi250019r18","article-title":"National performance benchmarks for screening digital breast tomosynthesis: update from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.","volume":"307","author":"Lee","year":"2023","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"issue":"28","key":"coi250019r19","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"3661","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.6607","article-title":"Moving towards best practice when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies.","volume":"34","author":"Austin","year":"2015","journal-title":"Stat Med"},{"issue":"5","key":"coi250019r20","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1701","DOI":"10.1111\/1475-6773.12182","article-title":"Methods for constructing and assessing propensity scores.","volume":"49","author":"Garrido","year":"2014","journal-title":"Health Serv Res"},{"issue":"8 Suppl","key":"coi250019r21","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"S84","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2013.01.013","article-title":"Prognostic score-based balance measures can be a useful diagnostic for propensity score methods in comparative effectiveness research.","volume":"66","author":"Stuart","year":"2013","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"issue":"1","key":"coi250019r22","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"77","DOI":"10.3102\/10769986027001077","article-title":"Quick and easy implementation of the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure for controlling the false positive rate in multiple comparisons.","volume":"27","author":"Thissen","year":"2002","journal-title":"J Educ Behav Stat"},{"key":"coi250019r23","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"9","DOI":"10.4103\/2156-7514.127838","article-title":"Initial experience with combination digital breast tomosynthesis plus full field digital mammography or full field digital mammography alone in the screening environment.","volume":"4","author":"Destounis","year":"2014","journal-title":"J Clin Imaging Sci"},{"key":"coi250019r24","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"119","DOI":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2019.01.019","article-title":"Double reading of automated breast ultrasound with digital mammography or digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer screening.","volume":"55","author":"Lee","year":"2019","journal-title":"Clin Imaging"},{"key":"coi250019r25","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"133","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejrad.2017.06.018","article-title":"A randomised trial of screening with digital breast tomosynthesis plus conventional digital 2D mammography versus 2D mammography alone in younger higher risk women.","volume":"94","author":"Maxwell","year":"2017","journal-title":"Eur J Radiol"},{"issue":"8","key":"coi250019r26","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1423","DOI":"10.3390\/diagnostics13081423","article-title":"The impact of adding digital breast tomosynthesis to BI-RADS categorization of mammographically equivocal breast lesions.","volume":"13","author":"Hassan","year":"2023","journal-title":"Diagnostics (Basel)"},{"issue":"5","key":"coi250019r27","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1148\/radiol.223142","article-title":"Digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography screening performance on successive screening rounds from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.","volume":"307","author":"Sprague","year":"2023","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"issue":"11","key":"coi250019r28","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"8089","DOI":"10.1007\/s00330-023-09705-x","article-title":"False-positive recalls in the prospective Malm\u00f6 Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial.","volume":"33","author":"Johnson","year":"2023","journal-title":"Eur Radiol"},{"issue":"16","key":"coi250019r29","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1784","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.2016.1708","article-title":"Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis and digital mammography in dense and nondense breasts.","volume":"315","author":"Rafferty","year":"2016","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"issue":"1","key":"coi250019r30","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"60","DOI":"10.1148\/radiol.2019190425","article-title":"Digital mammography versus breast tomosynthesis: impact of breast density on diagnostic performance in population-based screening.","volume":"293","author":"\u00d8ster\u00e5s","year":"2019","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"issue":"7","key":"coi250019r31","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e2011792","DOI":"10.1001\/jamanetworkopen.2020.11792","article-title":"Screening performance of digital breast tomosynthesis vs digital mammography in community practice by patient age, screening round, and breast density.","volume":"3","author":"Lowry","year":"2020","journal-title":"JAMA Netw Open"},{"issue":"4","key":"coi250019r32","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"629","DOI":"10.1093\/jnci\/djae011","article-title":"Response to Omoleye, Esserman, Olufunmilayo.","volume":"116","author":"Kerlikowske","year":"2024","journal-title":"J Natl Cancer Inst"},{"issue":"2","key":"coi250019r33","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"249","DOI":"10.1093\/jnci\/djad201","article-title":"Supplemental magnetic resonance imaging plus mammography compared with magnetic resonance imaging or mammography by extent of breast density.","volume":"116","author":"Kerlikowske","year":"2024","journal-title":"J Natl Cancer Inst"},{"issue":"8","key":"coi250019r34","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1136","DOI":"10.1016\/S1470-2045(19)30275-X","article-title":"MRI versus mammography for breast cancer screening in women with familial risk (FaMRIsc): a multicentre, randomised, controlled trial.","volume":"20","author":"Saadatmand","year":"2019","journal-title":"Lancet Oncol"},{"issue":"2","key":"coi250019r35","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"136","DOI":"10.1093\/jnci\/djz079","article-title":"Performance measures of magnetic resonance imaging plus mammography in the High Risk Ontario Breast Screening Program.","volume":"112","author":"Chiarelli","year":"2020","journal-title":"J Natl Cancer Inst"},{"issue":"1","key":"coi250019r36","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"81","DOI":"10.1148\/radiol.2019182660","article-title":"Performance of dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography for screening women at increased risk of breast cancer.","volume":"293","author":"Sung","year":"2019","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"issue":"9","key":"coi250019r37","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"902","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2023.04.002","article-title":"Breast cancer screening for women at higher-than-average risk: updated recommendations from the ACR.","volume":"20","author":"Monticciolo","year":"2023","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"issue":"3","key":"coi250019r39","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1478","DOI":"10.1007\/s00330-024-11085-9","article-title":"Interval breast cancer rates for tomosynthesis vs mammography population screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies.","volume":"35","author":"Libesman","year":"2025","journal-title":"Eur Radiol"},{"key":"coi250019r13","unstructured":"Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Homepage. Accessed July 5, 2024. https:\/\/www.bcsc-research.org\/"},{"key":"coi250019r16","unstructured":"Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. BCSC standard definitions, version 3.1. Updated September 15, 2023. Accessed July 5, 2024. https:\/\/www.bcsc-research.org\/data\/bcsc_standard_definitions"},{"key":"coi250019r38","unstructured":"Comparison of breast cancer screening with CESM to DBT in women with dense breasts (CMIST). ClinicalTrials.gov. March 10, 2025. Accessed April 22, 2025. https:\/\/clinicaltrials.gov\/study\/NCT05625659?term=NCT05625659&rank=1"}],"container-title":["JAMA Oncology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/jamanetwork.com\/journals\/jamaoncology\/articlepdf\/2834386\/jamaoncology_li_2025_oi_250019_1752269258.08495.pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,7,17]],"date-time":"2025-07-17T15:00:52Z","timestamp":1752764452000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/jamanetwork.com\/journals\/jamaoncology\/fullarticle\/2834386"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2025,7,1]]},"references-count":39,"journal-issue":{"issue":"7","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,7,1]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jamaoncol.2025.1209","relation":{},"ISSN":["2374-2437"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2374-2437","type":"print"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2025,7,1]]}}}