Table 5.
Diagnostic performance according to breast composition: DBT + FFDM vs FFDM
| Composition a,b,c (n = 210) a | Composition d (n = 55) b | ||||||
| DBT + FFDM | FFDM | P-value | DBT + FFDM | FFDM | P-value | ||
| Diagnostic performance (%) | Sensitivity | 95.2 (80/84) | 90.5 (76/84) | 0.451 | 63.6 (14/22) | 59.1 (13/22) | 0.642 |
| Specificity | 98.4 (124/126) | 81.7 (103/126) | 0.002 | 84.8 (28/33) | 75.8 (25/33) | 0.463 | |
| Positive predictive value | 97.6 (80/82) | 76.8 (76/99) | <.001 | 79.2 (19/24) | 61.9 (13/21) | 0.078 | |
| Negative predictive value | 96.9 (124/128) | 92.8 (103/111) | 0.589 | 90.3 (28/31) | 73.5 (25/34) | 0.072 | |
DBT, digital breast tomosynthesis; FFDM, full-field digital mammography.
Note.—Data in parentheses are the raw figures from which the percentages were calculated.
a
84 tumour cases and 126 negative controls.
b
22 tumour cases and 33 negative controls.
c
P-values were obtained by the Mcnemar test. P-value <0.050 was considered to indicate a statistically significant difference.