{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.041423948220064725, 'fraction_numerical': 0.020711974110032363, 'mean_word_length': 4.969111969111969, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography in Japanese population-based screening.

PURPOSE
To investigate how the greater contrast of full-field digital mammography (FFDM) affects the detection of suspicious lesions in Japanese population-based screening.


MATERIALS AND METHODS
Screen-film mammography (SFM) and FFDM were performed in 480 women aged 50 years or more. A set of mediolateral oblique views was obtained with each modality. All mammograms were independently double-read. The five-scale category assessment and type of finding using the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data system (BI-RADS) nomenclature were given. Intraobserver variance, recall rates, and positive predictive value were calculated.


RESULTS
The findings between the two modalities were discordant. kappa-values for each reader were 0.619 and 0.385, respectively. Almost half of the microcalcifications were called with both modalities. The detection of masses was less concordant between the readers (27%). The masses were detected more frequently with FFDM (73%). Other findings were only detected with one modality. The recall rate was not significantly different (2.9% with SFM vs. 4.2% with FFDM; p=0.253). The positive predictive value was not significantly different (14% with SFM vs. 10% with FFDM; p=0.69), either. Two patients with breast cancer were detected with both modalities.


CONCLUSION
Recall rates and positive predictive value were not significantly different between SFM and FFDM. Cancers were detected with both modalities.