Table 1.
Comparison of sensitivity and specificity of imaging technologies in breast cancer1
| First author (year) | M | US | MRI | Ref. | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| SE (%) | SP (%) | SE (%) | SP (%) | SE (%) | SP (%) | ||
| Kuhl (2000) | 33.0 | 30.0 | 33.0 | 12.0 | 100.0 | 64.0 | [47] |
| Warner (2001) | 33.0 | - | 60.0 | - | 100.0 | - | [48] |
| Berg (2004) | 67.8 | 75.0 | 83.0 | 34.0 | 94.4 | 26.0 | [49] |
| Kuhl (2005) | 32.6 | 96.8 | 39.5 | 90.5 | 90.7 | 97.2 | [46] |
| Warner (2008) | 32.0 | 94.7 | - | - | 75.0 | 96.1 | [50] |
| Sardanelli (2011) | 50.0 | 99.0 | 52.0 | 98.4 | 91.0 | 96.7 | [51] |
| Lehman (2012) | 61 | 94 | 96 | 89 | - | - | [52] |
| Tan (2014) | 49 | 89 | 82 | 84 | - | - | [53] |
| Song (2015) | 66.7 | 89.5 | 83.3 | 71.1 | 100.0 | 61.8 | [54] |
| Berg (2016) | 53 | 90 | 52 | 86 | - | - | [55] |
| Omidiji (2017) | 86 | 56 | 89 | 22 | - | - | [56] |
1
M: Mammography; US: Ultrasonography; MRI: Magnetic resonance imaging; SE: Sensitivity; SP: Specificity.