Back

Predicting 5-Year Breast Cancer Risk from Longitudinal Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: A Single-center Retrospective Study

Xu, Y.; Heacock, L.; Park, J.; Pasadyn, F. L.; Lei, Q.; Lewin, A.; Geras, K. J.; Moy, L.; Schnabel, F.; Shen, Y.

2026-03-24 radiology and imaging
10.64898/2026.03.22.26349001 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Imaging-based breast cancer risk prediction models primarily use full-field digital mammography (FFDM). As digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has become a predominant screening modality in the United States, its potential for long-term breast cancer risk prediction remains under-explored. Objective: To develop and evaluate a deep learning model that uses longitudinal DBT exams to predict long-term breast cancer risk. Methods: This retrospective study included 313,531 DBT exams from 161,165 women (mean age, 58.5, std 11.7 years) between January 2016 and August 2020 at Institute A. A risk prediction (DRP) model was developed to estimate 2-5 year breast cancer risk using longitudinal DBT exams, patient age and breast density. Model performance was compared with a single-time point DBT model, the Mirai model using same-day FFDM, and the Tyrer-Cuzick model using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), time-dependent concordance index, and integrated Brier score. Results: In an independent test set (n = 34,580), the longitudinal DRP model achieved a 5-year AUC of 0.720 (95% CI, 0.703-0.738), improving on the single time point DRP model (AUC, 0.706; 95% CI, 0.687-0.724; p < 0.001) and the Mirai model (AUC, 0.687; 95% CI, 0.668-0.705; p < 0.001). In a matched case-control cohort (n=432), the DRP model achieved a 5-year AUC of 0.676 (95% CI, 0.626-0.727), compared with 0.567 (95% CI, 0.514-0.621; p < 0.001) for the Tyrer-Cuzick model. The model reclassified 37.6% (705/1,877) of women with extremely dense breasts as average risk, with a 5-year cancer incidence of 0.7% (5/705), and identified 15.5% (404/2,605) of women with fatty breasts as high risk, with a 5-year cancer incidence of 2.5% (10/404). Conclusion: A deep learning model using longitudinal DBT examinations improved long-term breast cancer risk prediction compared with FFDM-based and clinical risk models. Clinical Impacts: Longitudinal DBT-based risk prediction may enable dynamic risk assessment using screening images, supporting personalized screening strategies and more targeted use of supplemental imaging.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Breast Cancer Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.2%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 8%
9.2%
3
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.2%
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 28%
6.4%
5
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.0%
6
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.9%
7
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.6%
8
JNCI Cancer Spectrum
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
50% of probability mass above
9
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.3%
10
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 43%
2.8%
11
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
12
European Radiology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.1%
13
JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics
18 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.9%
14
Communications Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
15
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
16
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
17
Frontiers in Endocrinology
53 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
18
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 36%
1.3%
19
npj Breast Cancer
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.3%
20
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
21
npj Precision Oncology
48 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.3%
22
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
23
Science Translational Medicine
111 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
24
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
25
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
17 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
26
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
27
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism
35 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
28
BMC Research Notes
29 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
29
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 57%
0.8%
30
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 26%
0.7%