Uematsu T, Nakashima K, Kikuchi M, Kubota K, Suzuki A, Nakano S, et al. The Japanese breast cancer society clinical practice guidelines for breast cancer screening and diagnosis 2018 edition. Breast Cancer. 2020;27:17–24.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Minds manual for guideline development 2020 ver.3.0. https://minds.jcqhc.or.jp/s/manual_2020_3_0. Accessed 23 Sep 2023

Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Reitsma JB, QUADAS-2 Group, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155:529–36.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Ohuchi N, Suzuki A, Sobue T, Kawai M, Yamamoto S, Zheng YF, J-START investigator groups, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of mammography and adjunctive ultrasonography to screen for breast cancer in the Japan strategic anti-cancer randomized trial (J-START): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387:341–8.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Huang Y, Kang M, Li H, Li JY, Zhang JY, Liu LH, et al. Combined performance of physical examination, mammography, and ultrasonography for breast cancer screening among Chinese women: follow-up study. Curr Oncol. 2012;19:eS22-30.

Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Honjo S, Ando J, Tsukioka T, Morikubo H, Ichimura M, Sunagawa M, et al. Relative and combined performance of mammography and ultrasonography for breast cancer screening in the general population: a pilot study in Tochigi Prefecture. Japan Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2007;37:715–20.

PubMed  Google Scholar 

Guindalini RSC, Zheng Y, Abe H, Whitaker K, Yoshimatsu TF, Walsh T, et al. Intensive surveillance with biannual dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging downstages breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers. Clin Cancer Res. 2019;25:1786–94.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Riedl CC, Luft N, Bernhart C, Weber M, Bernathova M, Tea MK, et al. Triple-modality screening trial for familial breast cancer underlines the importance of magnetic resonance imaging and questions the role of mammography and ultrasound regardless of patient mutation status, age, and breast density. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:1128–35.

Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Warner E, Plewes DB, Hill KA, Causer PA, Zubovits JT, Jong RA, et al. Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination. JAMA. 2004;292:1317–25.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Bosse K, Graeser M, Goßmann A, Hackenbroch M, Schmutzler RK, Rhiem K. Supplemental screening ultrasound increases cancer detection yield in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2014;289:663–70.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Leutner CC, Morakkabati-Spitz N, Wardelmann E, Fimmers R, et al. Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:8469–76.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Obdeijn IM, Boetes C, Zonderland HM, Muller SH, et al. Factors affecting sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography and MRI in women with an inherited risk for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006;100:109–19.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Passaperuma K, Warner E, Causer PA, Hill KA, Messner S, Wong JW, et al. Long-term results of screening with magnetic resonance imaging in women with BRCA mutations. Br J Cancer. 2012;107:24–30.

Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Rijnsburger AJ, Obdeijn IM, Kaas R, Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Boetes C, Loo CE, et al. BRCA1-associated breast cancers present differently from BRCA2-associated and familial cases:long-term follow-up of the Dutch MRISC Screening Study. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:5265–73.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Bick U, Engel C, Krug B, Heindel W, Fallenberg EM, Rhiem K, German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (GC-HBOC), et al. High-risk breast cancer surveillance with MRI:10-year experience from the German consortium for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019;175:217–28.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Cortesi L, Canossi B, Battista R, Pecchi A, Drago A, Dal Molin C, et al. Breast ultrasonography(BU)in the screening protocol for women at hereditary-familial risk of breast cancer: has the time come to rethink the role of BU according to different risk categories? Int J Cancer. 2019;144:1001–9.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Hagen AI, Kvistad KA, Maehle L, Holmen MM, Aase H, Styr B, et al. Sensitivity of MRI versus conventional screening in the diagnosis of BRCA-associated breast cancer in a national prospective series. Breast. 2007;16:367–74.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Evans DG, Kesavan N, Lim Y, Gadde S, Hurley E, Massat NJ, MARIBS Group, Howell A, Duffy SW, et al. MRI breast screening in high-risk women: cancer detection and survival analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014;145:663–72.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Chéreau E, Uzan C, Balleyguier C, Chevalier J, de Paillerets BB, Caron O, et al. Characteristics, treatment, and outcome of breast cancers diagnosed in BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers in intensive screening programs including magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Breast Cancer. 2010;10:113–8.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Evans DG, Harkness EF, Howell A, Wilson M, Hurley E, Holmen MM, et al. Intensive breast screening in BRCA2 mutation carriers is associated with reduced breast cancer specific and all-cause mortality. Hered Cancer Clin Pract. 2016;14:8.

Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Giannakeas V, Lewinski J, Gronwald J, Moller P, Armel S, Lynch HT, et al. Mammography screening and the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: a prospective study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014;147:113–8.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Narod SA, Lubinski J, Ghadirian P, Lynch HT, Moller P, Foulkes WD, Hereditary Breast Cancer Clinical Study Group, et al. Screening mammography and risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: a case-control study. Lancet Oncol. 2006;7:402–6.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Pijpe A, Andrieu N, Easton DF, Kesminiene A, Cardis E, Noguès C, GENEPSO; EMBRACE; HEBON, et al. Exposure to diagnostic radiation and risk of breast cancer among carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations:retrospective cohort study (GENE-RAD-RISK). BMJ. 2012;345:e5660.

Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Phi XA, Greuter MJW, Obdeijn IM, Oosterwijk JC, Feenstra TL, Houssami N, et al. Should women with a BRCA1/2 mutation aged 60 and older be offered intensified breast cancer screening? A Cost-Eff Anal Breast. 2019;45:82–8.

Google Scholar 

Petelin L, Trainer AH, Mitchell G, Liew D, James PA. Cost-effectiveness and comparative effectiveness of cancer risk management strategies in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers: a systematic review. Genet Med. 2018;20:1145–56.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Spiegel TN, Esplen MJ, Hill KA, Wong J, Causer PA, Warner E. Psychological impact of recall on women with BRCA mutations undergoing MRI surveillance. Breast. 2011;20:424–30.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Rijnsburger AJ, Essink-Bot ML, van Dooren S, Borsboom GJ, Seynaeve C, Bartels CC, et al. Impact of screening for breast cancer in high-risk women on health-related quality of life. Br J Cancer. 2004;91:69–76.

Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Essink-Bot ML, Rijnsburger AJ, van Dooren S, de Koning HJ, Seynaeve C. Women’s acceptance of MRI in breast cancer surveillance because of a familial or genetic predisposition. Breast. 2006;15:673–6.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

O’Neill SM, Rubinstein WS, Sener SF, Weissman SM, Newlin AC, West DK, et al. Psychological impact of recall in high-risk breast MRI screening. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;115:365–71.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Chiarelli AM, Blackmore KM, Muradali D, Done SJ, Majpruz V, Weerasinghe A, et al. Performance measures of magnetic resonance imaging plus mammography in the high risk ontario breast screening program. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2020;112:136–44.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Sardanelli F, Cozzi A, Trimboli RM, Schiaffino S. Gadolinium retention and breast MRI screening:more harm than good? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020;214:324–7.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Gilbert FJ, Tucker L, Gillan MG, Willsher P, Cooke J, Duncan KA, et al. The TOMMY trial: a comparison of TOMosynthesis with digital MammographY in the UK NHS breast screening programme: a multicentre retrospective reading study comparing the diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography with digital mammography alone. Health Technol Assess. 2015;19(i–xxv):1–136.

Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Waldherr C, Cerny P, Altermatt HJ, Berclaz G, Ciriolo M, Buser K, et al. Value of one-view breast tomosynthesis versus two-view mammography in diagnostic workup of women with clinical signs and symptoms and in women recalled from screening. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200:226–31.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Tagliafico A, Mariscotti G, Durando M, Stevanin C, Tagliafico G, Martino L, et al. Characterisation of microcalcification clusters on 2D digital mammography(FFDM)and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT):does DBT underestimate microcalcification clusters? Results of a multicentre study. Eur Radiol. 2015;25:9–14.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Mall S, Noakes J, Kossoff M, Lee W, McKessar M, Goy A, et al. Can digital breast tomosynthesis perform better than standard digital mammography work-up in breast cancer assessment clinic? Eur Radiol. 2018;28:5182–94.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

You C, Zhang Y, Gu Y, Xiao Q, Liu G, Shen X, et al. Comparison of the diagnostic performance of synthesized two-dimensional mammography and full-field digital mammography alone or in combination with digital breast tomosynthesis. Breast Cancer. 2020;27:47–53.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Bahl M, Mercaldo S, Vijapura CA, McCarthy AM, Lehman CD. Comparison of performance metrics with digital 2D versus tomosynthesis mammography in the diagnostic setting. Eur Radiol. 2019;29:477–84.