Recall and Cancer Detection Rates for Screening Mammography: Finding the Sweet Spot.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study is to identify the optimal screening mammography recall rate range on the basis of cancer detection rates among breast imaging specialists at an academic institution.


METHODS
Medical outcome audit data collected in accordance with the Mammography Quality Standards Act from September 1, 2007, through August 31, 2012, were reviewed. Cancer detection rates were calculated from 984 screen-detected cancers identified in 188,959 total digital screening mammograms. The percentages of minimally invasive and early-stage cancers were also calculated. The 75 annual recall rates were analyzed two ways. First, they were separated into recall groups to assess cancer detection rate variation by the recall categories using rate ratios: less than 10%, 10% to less than 12%, 12% to less than 14%, and 14% or higher. Next, a linear regression with bootstrap bias correction was performed to assess changes in cancer detection rate with each unit increase in the recall rate up to 20%, with the recall category of less than 7% taken as reference. Annual cancer detection rates for a physician were grouped according to annual percentage recall rate.


RESULTS
Statistically significantly higher cancer detection rates were seen for recall rates 12% or higher, with rate ratios of 1.75 (95% CI, 1.40-2.19) and 2.06 (95% CI, 1.72-2.46) for the recall groups 12% to less than 14% and 14% and higher, respectively, compared with the less than 10% group. When taking the category 12% to less than 14% as the reference, there were no statistically significant differences between recall groups 12% to less than 14% and 14% or higher in cancer detection rate. A statistically significant increase in the cancer detection rate with each unit increase in the recall rate was seen only for recall rates 12% or higher.


CONCLUSIONS
These observations suggest that the sweet spot for optimal cancer detection is in the recall rate range 12% to less than 14% with the incremental benefit above this to be relatively small. A recall rate less than 10% may be too low.
1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Rush Oak Park Hospital, 520 S Maple Ave, Oak Park, IL 60304.
Paula
P
Grabler
2 Metropolitan Chicago Breast Cancer Task Force, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL.
Dominique
D
Sighoko
3 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Breast Imaging Section, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago IL.
Lilian
L
Wang
4 Sinai Urban Health Institute, Sinai Health System, Chicago, IL.
Kristi
K
Allgood
5 Department of Internal Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL.
David
D
Ansell
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000453:epidemiology* / Q000517:prevention & control; D002641:Chicago / Q000453:epidemiology; D055088:Early Detection of Cancer / Q000592:standards* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D005188:False Negative Reactions; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008327:Mammography / Q000592:standards* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D008875:Middle Aged; D015588:Observer Variation; D017410:Practice Guidelines as Topic; D011785:Quality Assurance, Health Care / Q000379:methods / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D011786:Quality Control; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D014481:United States; D055815:Young Adult
American College of Radiology guidelines; cancer detection rates; recall rate; sweet spot