Skip to content

The Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Trial in Bergen

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis - The Future Screening Tool for Breast Cancer?

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02835625
Acronym
TOBE
Enrollment
29453
Registered
2016-07-18
Start date
2016-01-31
Completion date
2021-05-31
Last updated
2024-08-28

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Breast Neoplasms

Keywords

Diagnostic Imaging, Mammography, Randomized Controlled Trial, Tomosynthesis, Early performance measures, Recall, Radiation dose, Cancer detection, Sensitivity, Specificity, Cost, Economy

Brief summary

Compare synthetic mammography+digital breast tomosynthesis (SM+DBT) with digital mammography (DM) as a screening tool for women aged 50-69 years, invited to participate in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program at the screening unit in Bergen, Norway, with regard to early performance measures, including prognostic and predictive tumor characteristics, radiation doses and cost-effectiveness.

Detailed description

DBT is a new screening tool, argued to be better than standard DM. This statement is based on a lower recall rate, and a higher rate of early-stage screen-detected cancer. No studies have so far reported results from women screened with DBT from GE Healthcare, as far as the investigators know. DBT from GE offer synthetic two-dimensional DM generated from the DBT data (SM), and studies have shown similar detection rates for this technique as of adjacent DM. By comparing results of early performance measures and economic aspects in two comparable populations of women in the same age group, residing in the same county, the investigators can measure the effect of SM+DBT versus standard DM with equipment from GE Healthcare. The populations will be examined by the same radiographers, screen-read by the same radiologists, histologically breast cancer proven by the same pathologists, and treated by the same surgeons and oncologists. A prospective cohort study targeting 45,000 women invited to breast cancer screening in Bergen, Hordaland in the study period, 2016-2018, will be performed. A screening participation of approximately 75% is expected. All attending women will be asked if they are willing to participate in the study after receiving written and oral information about the study. Women willing to participate in the study will sign an informed consent. Of the attending women it is expected that about 90-95% will consent to participate in the study. The women will be randomized into two groups, a study group and a control group. The randomization will take place at the screening unit in Bergen. The outcome of the randomization is based on the 11-digit personal identification number assigned to every citizen in Norway. In the study group, the women will be screened with SM+DBT. In the control group, the women will be screened with DM. Women not willing to participate in the study will be screened with DM, and not included in our study. The investigators aim to address the following topics and research questions: * Study 1: Early performance measures in a population based screening program using SM+DBT versus DM - interim analyses. * Study 2: Use of SM+DBT versus DM in a population based screening program - a randomized controlled trial. * Study 3: Prognostic and predictive histopathologic characteristics of breast tumors detected in a population based program using SM+DBT versus DM. * Study 4: SM+DBT and DM in a populations based screening program - which technology has the highest sensitivity for women with mammographic dense breast? * Study 5 and 6: Costs of SM+DBT and DM in a populations based screening program - is SM+DBT cost-effective?

Interventions

RADIATIONSynthetic Mammography + Digital Breast Tomosynthesis

Two-view tomosynthesis performed with GE Senoclaire 3D Breast Tomosynthesis.

Two-view digital mammography performed with GE Senoclaire 3D Breast Tomosynthesis.

Sponsors

Haukeland University Hospital
CollaboratorOTHER
University of Oslo
CollaboratorOTHER
The Research Council of Norway
CollaboratorOTHER
Norwegian Institute of Public Health
Lead SponsorOTHER_GOV

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
48 Years to 71 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Informed consent

Exclusion criteria

* Breast implants

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Participants With Screen-Detected Breast Cancer36 months from start up of the trialComparison of rates of screen-detected breast cancer in tomosynthesis versus digital mammography as performed in a population based screening program.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Participants Recalled for Further Assesment Due to Mammographic Findings36 months from start up of the trialComparison of rate of recall for further assesment due to mammographic findings in tomosynthesis versus digital mammography as performed in a population based screening program.
Incremental Costs of Screening With Tomosynthesis Versus Digital Mammography36 months from start up of the trialThe incremental cost per woman screened with digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography in a population-based breast cancer screening program.
Prognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast Cancer36 months from start up of the trialDistribution of characteristics among the women diagnosed with breast cancer screened with tomosynthesis versus digital mammography in a population based screening program.
Number of Participants With Interval Breast Cancer60 months from start up of the trialRate of interval breast cancer among those screened with tomosynthesis versus digital mammography as performed in a population based screening program.
Number and Percentage of Participants Screen-Detected Breast Cancer Among Participants Recalled for Further Assesment36 months from start up of the trialPositive predictive value of recalls (number of screen-detected breast cancer among participants recalled for further assesment) for tomosynthesis versus digital mammography in a population based screening program.

Other

MeasureTime frameDescription
Radiation Doses When Screening With Tomosynthesis Versus Digital Mammography24 months from start up of the trialRadiation doses will be measured for screening with tomosynthesis and digital mammography by an automated software, in milligray (mGy).
Mammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast Cancer36 months from start up of the trialDistribution of characteristics among the women diagnosed with breast cancer screened with tomosynthesis versus digital mammography in a population based screening program.
Time Spent on Screen-Reading and Consensus Meetings24 months from start up of the trialThe time spent on screen-reading and consensus will be compared for tomosynthesis versus digital mammography

Countries

Norway

Participant flow

Recruitment details

Women were invited to participate when attending screening at the screening unit Danmarksplass in Bergen, Norway. The recruitment period lasted from January 14th 2016 to December 15th 2017.

Pre-assignment details

Women that attended screening but had breast implant were not invited to participate, and thus not randomized to either of the study groups.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Digital Breast Tomosynthesis
Digital Breast Tomosynthesis + Synthetic Mammography (DBT) The DBT was independently read by two radiologists. A consensus meeting decided whether to recall the woman or not. Women selected for further assessment (positive screening exam) was recalled. Digital Breast Tomosynthesis + Synthetic Mammography: Two-view tomosynthesis performed with GE SenoClaire 3D Breast Tomosynthesis.
14,380
Digital Mammography
The digital mammograms was independently read by two radiologists. A consensus meeting decided whether to recall the woman or not. Women selected for further assessment (positive screening exam) was recalled. Digital mammography: Two-view digital mammography performed with GE SenoClaire 3D Breast Tomosynthesis.
14,369
Total28,749

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicDigital Breast TomosynthesisDigital MammographyTotal
Age, Customized
55-59 years
3628 Participants3668 Participants7296 Participants
Age, Customized
<55 years
3746 Participants3813 Participants7559 Participants
Age, Customized
60-64 years
3625 Participants3492 Participants7117 Participants
Age, Customized
>64 years
3381 Participants3396 Participants6777 Participants
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected0 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Norway
14380 participants14369 participants28749 participants
Screening history
Prevalent (first screening)
2013 Participants2053 Participants4066 Participants
Screening history
Subsequent
12367 Participants12316 Participants24683 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
14380 Participants14369 Participants28749 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
2 / 14,7342 / 14,719
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 14,7340 / 14,719
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 14,7340 / 14,719

Outcome results

Primary

Number of Participants With Screen-Detected Breast Cancer

Comparison of rates of screen-detected breast cancer in tomosynthesis versus digital mammography as performed in a population based screening program.

Time frame: 36 months from start up of the trial

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Digital Breast TomosynthesisNumber of Participants With Screen-Detected Breast Cancer95 Participants
Digital MammographyNumber of Participants With Screen-Detected Breast Cancer87 Participants
Secondary

Incremental Costs of Screening With Tomosynthesis Versus Digital Mammography

The incremental cost per woman screened with digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography in a population-based breast cancer screening program.

Time frame: 36 months from start up of the trial

Population: For each participant, the incremental cost of tomosynthesis vs. digital mammography were estimated, not the total cost of tomosynthesis vs. digital mammography. The investigators assumed that costs not pertaining to examination and reading times, mammograph price, IT storage and connectivity were equal for the two. This Outcome Measure was pre-specified to present the incremental costs per screened woman. By nature, incremental costs are calculated between groups.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)
Digital Breast TomosynthesisIncremental Costs of Screening With Tomosynthesis Versus Digital MammographyIncremental costs of DBT vs. DM in Euro8.5
Digital Breast TomosynthesisIncremental Costs of Screening With Tomosynthesis Versus Digital MammographyIncremental cost of DBT vs. DM after adding costs of recall, in Euro6.2
Secondary

Number and Percentage of Participants Screen-Detected Breast Cancer Among Participants Recalled for Further Assesment

Positive predictive value of recalls (number of screen-detected breast cancer among participants recalled for further assesment) for tomosynthesis versus digital mammography in a population based screening program.

Time frame: 36 months from start up of the trial

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Digital Breast TomosynthesisNumber and Percentage of Participants Screen-Detected Breast Cancer Among Participants Recalled for Further Assesment95 Participants
Digital MammographyNumber and Percentage of Participants Screen-Detected Breast Cancer Among Participants Recalled for Further Assesment87 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants Recalled for Further Assesment Due to Mammographic Findings

Comparison of rate of recall for further assesment due to mammographic findings in tomosynthesis versus digital mammography as performed in a population based screening program.

Time frame: 36 months from start up of the trial

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Digital Breast TomosynthesisNumber of Participants Recalled for Further Assesment Due to Mammographic Findings444 Participants
Digital MammographyNumber of Participants Recalled for Further Assesment Due to Mammographic Findings571 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Interval Breast Cancer

Rate of interval breast cancer among those screened with tomosynthesis versus digital mammography as performed in a population based screening program.

Time frame: 60 months from start up of the trial

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Digital Breast TomosynthesisNumber of Participants With Interval Breast Cancer20 Participants
Digital MammographyNumber of Participants With Interval Breast Cancer29 Participants
Secondary

Prognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast Cancer

Distribution of characteristics among the women diagnosed with breast cancer screened with tomosynthesis versus digital mammography in a population based screening program.

Time frame: 36 months from start up of the trial

Population: When collecting information on histopathological tumor characteristics, not all participants had information available on all variables.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Digital Breast TomosynthesisPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerHistological type : Carcinoma (no special type)62 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerTumor diameter : >=10-<20 mm43 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerTumor diameter : >=20 mm17 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerEstrogen receptor positive71 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerHistological type : Lobular carcinoma6 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerHistological type : Tubular carcinoma2 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerHistological type : Other carcinoma10 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerTumor diameter : <10 mm10 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerLymph node positive14 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerHistological grade : grade 122 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerHistological grade : grade 238 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerHistological grade : grade 316 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerProgesterone receptor positive61 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerHER2 positive8 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerKi67 >=30%21 Participants
Digital MammographyPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerEstrogen receptor positive69 Participants
Digital MammographyPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerTumor diameter : <10 mm18 Participants
Digital MammographyPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerLymph node positive18 Participants
Digital MammographyPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerTumor diameter : >=10-<20 mm29 Participants
Digital MammographyPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerHER2 positive8 Participants
Digital MammographyPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerTumor diameter : >=20 mm13 Participants
Digital MammographyPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerHistological grade : grade 124 Participants
Digital MammographyPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerHistological type : Carcinoma (no special type)51 Participants
Digital MammographyPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerProgesterone receptor positive62 Participants
Digital MammographyPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerHistological type : Lobular carcinoma13 Participants
Digital MammographyPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerHistological grade : grade 235 Participants
Digital MammographyPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerHistological type : Tubular carcinoma4 Participants
Digital MammographyPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerKi67 >=30%13 Participants
Digital MammographyPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerHistological type : Other carcinoma3 Participants
Digital MammographyPrognostic and Predictive Tumor Characteristics for Screen-Detected Breast CancerHistological grade : grade 310 Participants
Other Pre-specified

Mammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast Cancer

Distribution of characteristics among the women diagnosed with breast cancer screened with tomosynthesis versus digital mammography in a population based screening program.

Time frame: 36 months from start up of the trial

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Digital Breast TomosynthesisMammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast CancerAssociated features1 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisMammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast CancerArchitectural distortion10 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisMammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast CancerAsymmetry7 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisMammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast CancerObscured mass1 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisMammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast CancerSpiculated mass35 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisMammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast CancerIndistinct mass16 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisMammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast CancerCalcifications13 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisMammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast CancerMass with calcifications7 Participants
Digital Breast TomosynthesisMammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast CancerCircumscribed mass5 Participants
Digital MammographyMammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast CancerCalcifications20 Participants
Digital MammographyMammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast CancerIndistinct mass16 Participants
Digital MammographyMammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast CancerArchitectural distortion7 Participants
Digital MammographyMammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast CancerCircumscribed mass2 Participants
Digital MammographyMammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast CancerAsymmetry12 Participants
Digital MammographyMammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast CancerObscured mass3 Participants
Digital MammographyMammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast CancerAssociated features0 Participants
Digital MammographyMammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast CancerMass with calcifications11 Participants
Digital MammographyMammographic Features of Screen-Detected Breast CancerSpiculated mass16 Participants
Other Pre-specified

Radiation Doses When Screening With Tomosynthesis Versus Digital Mammography

Radiation doses will be measured for screening with tomosynthesis and digital mammography by an automated software, in milligray (mGy).

Time frame: 24 months from start up of the trial

Population: Interim analysis performed on study population from the first year of the trial (2016). Not all women had available information on radiation dose.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Digital Breast TomosynthesisRadiation Doses When Screening With Tomosynthesis Versus Digital Mammography2.96 mGyStandard Deviation 0.62
Digital MammographyRadiation Doses When Screening With Tomosynthesis Versus Digital Mammography2.95 mGyStandard Deviation 0.38
Other Pre-specified

Time Spent on Screen-Reading and Consensus Meetings

The time spent on screen-reading and consensus will be compared for tomosynthesis versus digital mammography

Time frame: 24 months from start up of the trial

Population: Interim analysis performed on study population from the first year of the trial (2016). All cases were screen-read by two radiologist, however not all were discussed at consensus.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Digital Breast TomosynthesisTime Spent on Screen-Reading and Consensus MeetingsInitial screen reading70.5 secondsStandard Deviation 54.4
Digital Breast TomosynthesisTime Spent on Screen-Reading and Consensus MeetingsConsensus reading192.1 secondsStandard Deviation 118.1
Digital MammographyTime Spent on Screen-Reading and Consensus MeetingsInitial screen reading41.3 secondsStandard Deviation 49.6
Digital MammographyTime Spent on Screen-Reading and Consensus MeetingsConsensus reading131.9 secondsStandard Deviation 79.2

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 6, 2026