RESUMO
The objective of this study was to estimate the risk of radiation-induced injury to the organs due to ionizing radiation following breast screening recommendations employing digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and digital mammography (DM). Using the Monte Carlo method, absorbed doses in the tissues and organs were calculated on an adult female phantom, considering two-view craniocaudal (CC) and mediolateral oblique (MLO) projections for each breast. The results showed differences in the total effective risk due to DM (CC + MLO) and DBT (CC + MLO) examinations in Brazil, ranging from 20.73 cases 10-5(DM) to 27.19 cases 10-5(DBT). Significant differences were also observed in the total effective risk of cancer incidence in the lungs due to DM (CC + MLO) and DBT (CC + MLO), ranging from 1.75×10-01cases 10-5(DM) to 1.76×10-01cases 10-5(DBT). The results indicate that the total effective risk of incidence should be considered as an additional parameter for the evaluation of DBT or DBT + DM program performance.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Neoplasias Induzidas por Radiação , Adulto , Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Feminino , Humanos , Mamografia , Programas de Rastreamento , Neoplasias Induzidas por Radiação/epidemiologia , Neoplasias Induzidas por Radiação/etiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Current clinical guidelines recommend mammography as the only imaging method for surveillance in asymptomatic survivors of early breast cancer (EBC). However, non-recommended tests are commonly used. We estimated the imaging radiation-induced malignancies (IRIM) risks in survivors of EBC undergoing different imaging surveillance models. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We built 5 theoretical models of imaging surveillance, from annual mammography only (model 1) to increasingly imaging-intensive approaches, including computed tomography (CT) scan, positron emission tomography-CT, bone scan, and multigated acquisition scan (models 2 through 5). Using the National Cancer Institute's Radiation Risk Assessment Tool, we compared the excess lifetime attributable cancer risk (LAR) for hypothetical survivors of EBC starting surveillance at the ages of 30, 60, or 75 years and ending at 81 years. RESULTS: For all age groups analyzed, there is a statistically significant increase in LAR when comparing model 1 with more intensive models. As an example, in a patient beginning surveillance at the age of 60 years, there is a 28.5-fold increase in the IRIM risk when comparing mammography only versus a schedule with mammography plus CT scan of chest-abdomen and bone scan. We found no differences when comparing models 2 through 5. LAR is higher when surveillance starts at a younger age, although the age effect was only statistically significant in model 1. CONCLUSION: Non-recommended imaging during EBC surveillance can be associated with a significant increase in LAR. In addition to the lack of survival benefit, additional tests may have significant IRIM risks and should be avoided.