Collaborative Modeling to Compare Different Breast Cancer Screening Strategies A Decision Analysis for the US Preventive Services Task Force

被引:24
作者
Trentham-Dietz, Amy [1 ,2 ]
Chapman, Christina Hunter [3 ,4 ]
Jayasekera, Jinani [5 ]
Lowry, Kathryn P. [6 ]
Heckman-Stoddard, Brandy M. [7 ]
Hampton, John M. [1 ,2 ]
Caswell-Jin, Jennifer L. [8 ]
Gangnon, Ronald E. [1 ,2 ,9 ]
Lu, Ying [10 ]
Huang, Hui [11 ]
Stein, Sarah [12 ]
Sun, Liyang [10 ]
Quessep, Eugenio J. Gil [13 ]
Yang, Yuanliang [14 ]
Lu, Yifan [15 ,16 ]
Song, Juhee [14 ]
Munoz, Diego F. [10 ]
Li, Yisheng [14 ]
Kurian, Allison W. [17 ,18 ]
Kerlikowske, Karla [19 ,20 ]
O'Meara, Ellen S. [21 ]
Sprague, Brian L. [22 ]
Tosteson, Anna N. A. [23 ,24 ,25 ]
Feuer, Eric J. [26 ]
Berry, Donald [14 ]
Plevritis, Sylvia K. [27 ,28 ]
Huang, Xuelin [14 ]
de Koning, Harry J. [13 ]
van Ravesteyn, Nicolien T. [13 ]
Lee, Sandra J. [11 ]
Alagoz, Oguzhan [15 ,16 ]
Schechter, Clyde B. [29 ]
Stout, Natasha K. [12 ,26 ]
Miglioretti, Diana L. [21 ,30 ]
Mandelblatt, Jeanne S. [31 ,32 ,33 ]
机构
[1] Univ Wisconsin Madison, Sch Med & Publ Hlth, Dept Populat Hlth Sci, 610 Walnut St,WARF Room 307, Madison, WI 53726 USA
[2] Univ Wisconsin Madison, Sch Med & Publ Hlth, Carbone Canc Ctr, 610 Walnut St,WARF Room 307, Madison, WI 53726 USA
[3] Baylor Coll Med, Dept Radiat Oncol, Houston, TX USA
[4] Baylor Coll Med, Ctr Innovat Qual Safety & Effectiveness, Houston, TX USA
[5] Natl Inst Minor Hlth & Hlth Dispar, Hlth Equ & Decis Sci HEADS Res Lab, Div Intramural Res, NIH, Bethesda, MD USA
[6] Univ Washington, Sch Med, Seattle, WA USA
[7] NCI, Canc Prevent Div, NIH, Bethesda, MD USA
[8] Stanford Univ, Dept Med, Sch Med, Stanford, CA USA
[9] Univ Wisconsin Madison, Sch Med & Publ Hlth, Dept Biostat & Med Informat, Madison, WI USA
[10] Stanford Univ, Stanford, CA USA
[11] Dana Farber Canc Inst, Dept Data Sci, Boston, MA USA
[12] Harvard Pilgrim Hlth Care Inst, Boston, MA USA
[13] Univ Med Ctr, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[14] Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Houston, TX USA
[15] Univ Wisconsin Madison, Dept Ind & Syst Engn, Madison, WI USA
[16] Univ Wisconsin Madison, Carbone Canc Ctr, Madison, WI USA
[17] Stanford Univ, Dept Med, Stanford, CA USA
[18] Stanford Univ, Dept Epidemiol & Populat Hlth, Stanford, CA USA
[19] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Med, San Francisco, CA USA
[20] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, San Francisco, CA USA
[21] Kaiser Permanente Washington Hlth Res Inst, Seattle, WA USA
[22] Univ Vermont, Dept Surg, Burlington, VT USA
[23] Dartmouth Geisel Sch Med, Dartmouth Inst Hlth Policy & Clin Practice, Hanover, NH USA
[24] Dartmouth Geisel Sch Med, Dept Med, Hanover, NH USA
[25] Dartmouth Geisel Sch Med, Dept Community & Family Med, Hanover, NH USA
[26] NCI, Div Canc Control & Populat Sci, NIH, Bethesda, MD USA
[27] Stanford Univ, Dept Biomed Data Sci, Stanford, CA USA
[28] Stanford Univ, Dept Radiol, Stanford, CA USA
[29] Albert Einstein Coll Med, Bronx, NY USA
[30] Univ Calif Davis, Dept Publ Hlth Sci, Davis, CA USA
[31] Georgetown Univ, Dept Oncol, Med Ctr, Washington, DC USA
[32] Georgetown Univ, Dept Med, Med Ctr, Washington, DC USA
[33] Georgetown Univ, Georgetown Lombardi Comprehens Inst Canc & Aging, Lombardi Comprehens Canc Ctr, Washington, DC USA
来源
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION | 2024年 / 331卷 / 22期
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
NATIONALLY REPRESENTATIVE VALUES; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; ADULT-POPULATION; SIMULATION-MODEL; UNITED-STATES; TOMOSYNTHESIS; WOMEN; SURVIVAL; AGE; METAANALYSIS;
D O I
10.1001/jama.2023.24766
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
IMPORTANCE The effects of breast cancer incidence changes and advances in screening and treatment on outcomes of different screening strategies are not well known. OBJECTIVE To estimate outcomes of various mammography screening strategies. DESIGN, SETTING, AND POPULATION Comparison of outcomes using 6 Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models and national data on breast cancer incidence, mammography performance, treatment effects, and other-cause mortality in US women without previous cancer diagnoses. EXPOSURES Thirty-six screening strategies with varying start ages (40, 45, 50 years) and stop ages (74, 79 years) with digital mammography or digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) annually, biennially, or a combination of intervals. Strategies were evaluated for all women and for Black women, assuming 100% screening adherence and "real-world" treatment. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Estimated lifetime benefits (breast cancer deaths averted, percent reduction in breast cancer mortality, life-years gained), harms (false-positive recalls, benign biopsies, overdiagnosis), and number of mammograms per 1000 women. RESULTS Biennial screening with DBT starting at age 40, 45, or 50 years until age 74 years averted a median of 8.2, 7.5, or 6.7 breast cancer deaths per 1000 women screened, respectively, vs no screening. Biennial DBT screening at age 40 to 74 years (vs no screening) was associated with a 30.0% breast cancer mortality reduction, 1376 false-positive recalls, and 14 overdiagnosed cases per 1000 women screened. Digital mammography screening benefits were similar to those for DBT but had more false-positive recalls. Annual screening increased benefits but resulted in more false-positive recalls and overdiagnosed cases. Benefit-to-harm ratios of continuing screening until age 79 years were similar or superior to stopping at age 74. In all strategies, women with higher-than-average breast cancer risk, higher breast density, and lower comorbidity level experienced greater screening benefits than other groups. Annual screening of Black women from age 40 to 49 years with biennial screening thereafter reduced breast cancer mortality disparities while maintaining similar benefit-to-harm trade-offs as for all women. CONCLUSIONS This modeling analysis suggests that biennial mammography screening starting at age 40 years reduces breast cancer mortality and increases life-years gained per mammogram. More intensive screening for women with greater risk of breast cancer diagnosis or death can maintain similar benefit-to-harm trade-offs and reduce mortality disparities.
引用
收藏
页码:1947 / 1960
页数:14
相关论文
共 71 条
[1]  
Abe O, 2005, LANCET, V366, P2087, DOI 10.1016/s0140-6736(05)66544-0
[2]   Performance of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis, Synthetic Mammography, and Digital Mammography in Breast Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis [J].
Alabousi, Mostafa ;
Wadera, Akshay ;
Al-Ghita, Mohammed Kashif ;
Al-Ghetaa, Rayeh Kashef ;
Salameh, Jean-Paul ;
Pozdnyakov, Alex ;
Zha, Nanxi ;
Samoilov, Lucy ;
Sharifabadi, Anahita Dehmoobad ;
Sadeghirad, Behnam ;
Freitas, Vivianne ;
McInnes, Matthew D. F. ;
Alabousi, Abdullah .
JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2021, 113 (06) :680-690
[3]   The University of Wisconsin Breast Cancer Epidemiology Simulation Model: An Update [J].
Alagoz, Oguzhan ;
Ergun, Mehmet Ali ;
Cevik, Mucahit ;
Sprague, Brian L. ;
Fryback, Dennis G. ;
Gangnon, Ronald E. ;
Hampton, John M. ;
Stout, Natasha K. ;
Trentham-Dietz, Amy .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2018, 38 :99S-111S
[4]   Comparisons between different polychemotherapy regimens for early breast cancer: meta-analyses of long-term outcome among 100 000 women in 123 randomised trials [J].
Albain, K. ;
Anderson, S. ;
Arriagada, R. ;
Barlow, W. ;
Bergh, J. ;
Bliss, J. ;
Buyse, M. ;
Cameron, D. ;
Carrasco, E. ;
Clarke, M. ;
Correa, C. ;
Coates, A. ;
Collins, R. ;
Costantino, J. ;
Cutter, D. ;
Cuzick, J. ;
Darby, S. ;
Davidson, N. ;
Davies, C. ;
Davies, K. ;
Delmestri, A. ;
Di Leo, A. ;
Dowsett, M. ;
Elphinstone, P. ;
Evans, V. ;
Ewertz, M. ;
Gelber, R. ;
Gettins, L. ;
Geyer, C. ;
Goldhirsch, A. ;
Godwin, J. ;
Gray, R. ;
Gregory, C. ;
Hayes, D. ;
Hill, C. ;
Ingle, J. ;
Jakesz, R. ;
James, S. ;
Kaufmann, M. ;
Kerr, A. ;
MacKinnon, E. ;
McGale, P. ;
McHugh, T. ;
Norton, L. ;
Ohashi, Y. ;
Paik, S. ;
Pan, H. C. ;
Perez, E. ;
Peto, R. ;
Piccart, M. .
LANCET, 2012, 379 (9814) :432-444
[5]   Long-term outcomes for neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer: meta-analysis of individual patient data from ten randomised trials [J].
Alberro, J. A. ;
Ballester, B. ;
Deulofeu, P. ;
Fabregas, R. ;
Fraile, M. ;
Gubern, J. M. ;
Janer, J. ;
Moral, A. ;
de Pablo, J. L. ;
Penalva, G. ;
Puig, P. ;
Ramos, M. ;
Rojo, R. ;
Santesteban, P. ;
Serra, C. ;
Sola, M. ;
Solarnau, L. ;
Solsona, J. ;
Veloso, E. ;
Vidal, S. ;
Abe, O. ;
Abe, R. ;
Enomoto, K. ;
Kikuchi, K. ;
Koyama, H. ;
Masuda, H. ;
Nomura, Y. ;
Ohashi, Y. ;
Sakai, K. ;
Sugimachi, K. ;
Toi, M. ;
Tominaga, T. ;
Uchino, J. ;
Yoshida, M. ;
Coles, C. E. ;
Haybittle, J. L. ;
Moebus, V. ;
Leonard, C. F. ;
Calais, G. ;
Garaud, P. ;
Collett, V. ;
Davies, C. ;
Delmestri, A. ;
Sayer, J. ;
Harvey, V. J. ;
Holdaway, I. M. ;
Kay, R. G. ;
Mason, B. H. ;
Forbe, J. F. ;
Franci, P. A. .
LANCET ONCOLOGY, 2018, 19 (01) :27-39
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2009, Ann Intern Med, V151, pI, DOI 10.7326/0003-4819-151-9-200911030-00002
[7]   Breast Cancer Characteristics Associated with 2D Digital Mammography versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Screening-detected and Interval Cancers [J].
Bahl, Manisha ;
Gaffney, Shannon ;
McCarthy, Anne Marie ;
Lowry, Kathryn P. ;
Dang, Pragya A. ;
Lehman, Constance D. .
RADIOLOGY, 2018, 287 (01) :49-57
[8]  
Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network National Cancer Institute, BREAST CANC MODELING
[9]   Linking Structural Racism and Discrimination and Breast Cancer Outcomes: A Social Genomics Approach [J].
Carlos, Ruth C. ;
Obeng-Gyasi, Samilia ;
Cole, Steven W. ;
Zebrack, Bradley J. ;
Pisano, Etta D. ;
Troester, Melissa A. ;
Timsina, Lava ;
Wagner, Lynne I. ;
Steingrimsson, Jon A. ;
Gareen, Ilana ;
Lee, Christoph I. ;
Adams, Alyce S. ;
Wilkins, Consuelo H. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2022, 40 (13) :1407-+
[10]   Change in Survival in Metastatic Breast Cancer with Treatment Advances: Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review [J].
Caswell-Jin, Jennifer L. ;
Plevritis, Sylvia K. ;
Tian, Lu ;
Cadham, Christopher J. ;
Xu, Cong ;
Stout, Natasha K. ;
Sledge, George W. ;
Mandelblatt, Jeanne S. ;
Kurian, Allison W. .
JNCI CANCER SPECTRUM, 2018, 2 (04)