Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39786515›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2025

The Screening Tomosynthesis Trial with Advanced Reader Methods (STREAM): design and rationale of a population-based breast cancer screening trial.

Lindy Kregting, Daan van den Oever, Lian Pennings, Ruud Pijnappel, Nicolien van Ravesteyn, Ellen Verschuur, Marja van Oirsouw, Loes Dunning, Hans 't Mannetje, Ruben van Engen and 6 more

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Lindy Kregting *Radboud University Medical Center, IQ Health science department, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8262-0080
Daan van den Oever *Radboud University Medical Center, Department of Medical Imaging, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Lian PenningsRadboud University Medical Center, Department of Medical Imaging, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Ruud PijnappelDutch Expert Centre for Screening (LRCB), Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Nicolien van RavesteynErasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Department of Public Health, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Ellen VerschuurDutch Breast Cancer Association, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Marja van OirsouwDutch Breast Cancer Association, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Loes DunningThe Dutch Organisation for Population Screening, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Hans 't MannetjeThe Dutch Organisation for Population Screening, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Ruben van EngenDutch Expert Centre for Screening (LRCB), Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Adriana BluekensDutch Expert Centre for Screening (LRCB), Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Maartje Smid-GeirnaerdtDutch Expert Centre for Screening (LRCB), Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Cary van Landsveld-VerhoevenDutch Expert Centre for Screening (LRCB), Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Nehmat HoussamiThe Daffodil Centre, the University of Sydney-Joint venture with Cancer Council NSW -Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney, Australia.
Ioannis SechopoulosRadboud University Medical Center, Department of Medical Imaging, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Mireille BroedersRadboud University Medical Center, IQ Health science department, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Mireille.Broeders@radboudumc.nl.

Funding

KWF Kankerbestrijding 2021-13710ZonMw 05550402130002
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIt is uncertain what the effects of introducing digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in the Dutch breast cancer screening programme would be on detection, recall, and interval cancers (ICs), while reading times are expected to increase. Therefore, an investigation into the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of DBT screening while optimising reading is required. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe Screening Tomosynthesis trial with advanced REAding Methods (STREAM) aims to include 17,275 women (age 50-72 years) eligible for breast cancer screening in the Netherlands for two biennial DBT screening rounds to determine the short-, medium-, and long-term effects and acceptability of DBT screening and identify an optimised strategy for reading DBT. The control group will consist of 86,400 women selected from the database of the Dutch breast cancer screening programme screened with digital mammography. The intervention group will undergo DBT examinations only. Four different reading strategies will be evaluated on a subset of first-round screening exams. These four strategies will also be evaluated combined with replacing one of the two readers with AI predictions. The Microsimulation Screening Analysis (MISCAN)-Breast model will be used to estimate the long-term outcomes of DBT screening assuming the best-performing reading method.

resultsThe primary outcome measure is the IC and advanced cancer rate at the second round (combined endpoint) in the DBT group compared to the control group. Secondary outcome measures are participation, recall and detection rates, positive predictive value, acceptability, reading method with the best case-based area under the curve and reading time, predicted breast cancer mortality, number of cancers overdiagnosed, and cost-effectiveness. KEY POINTS: Question The short-, medium-, and long-term effects of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) imaging in the Dutch breast cancer screening programme are unknown, but essential to decide about implementation. Findings This protocol paper describes the primary endpoint of the STREAM trial: the combined interval and advanced cancer detection rate at the second DBT round. Clinical relevance The STREAM trial is a prospective, non-randomised, population-based study in the Dutch breast cancer screening programme, that aims to evaluate the effects and acceptability of two rounds of DBT screening to determine if DBT can enhance the programme's outcomes.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerMammographyAgedCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedNetherlandsBreast neoplasmsCost-Benefit AnalysisEarly Detection of CancerMammographyMass Screening

Identifiers

PMID39786515
PMCPMC12165985

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.