Comparison of cumulative false-positive risk of screening mammography in the United States and Denmark

被引:12
|
作者
Jacobsen, Katja Kemp [1 ]
Abraham, Linn [2 ]
Buist, Diana S. M. [2 ]
Hubbard, Rebecca A. [3 ]
O'Meara, Ellen S. [2 ]
Sprague, Brian L. [4 ]
Kerlikowske, Karla [5 ,6 ]
Vejborg, Ilse [7 ]
Von Euler-Chelpin, My [1 ]
Njor, Sisse Helle [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Copenhagen, Dept Publ Hlth, DK-1014 Copenhagen K, Denmark
[2] Grp Hlth Res Inst, Seattle, WA USA
[3] Univ Penn, Dept Biostat & Epidemiol, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[4] Univ Vermont, Dept Surg, Burlington, VT 05405 USA
[5] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[6] Univ Calif San Francisco, Gen Internal Med Sect, Dept Vet Affairs, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[7] Rigshosp, Ctr Diagnost Imaging, Copenhagen Univ Hosp, Copenhagen, Denmark
关键词
Breast neoplasm; False-positive reactions; Methods; Mass screening; Mammography; BREAST-CANCER; COMMUNITY RADIOLOGISTS; HORMONE-THERAPY; WOMEN; PROGRAM; RECALL; AGE; RECOMMENDATION; PARTICIPATION; ACCURACY;
D O I
10.1016/j.canep.2015.05.004
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Introduction: In the United States (US), about one-half of women screened with annual mammography have at least one false-positive test after ten screens. The estimate for European women screened ten times biennially is much lower. We evaluate to what extent screening interval, mammogram type, and statistical methods, can explain the reported differences. Methods: We included all screens from women first screened at age 50-69 years in the US Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) (n = 99,455) between 1996-2010, and from two population-based mammography screening programs in Denmark (n = 230,452 and n = 400,204), between 1991-2012 and 1993-2013, respectively. Model-based cumulative false-positive risks were computed for the entire sample, using two statistical methods (Hubbard Njor) previously used to estimate false-positive risks in the US and Europe. Results: Empirical cumulative risk of at least one false-positive test after eight (annual or biennial) screens was 41.9% in BCSC, 16.1% in Copenhagen, and 7.4% in Funen. Variation in screening interval and mammogram type did not explain the differences by country. Using the Hubbard method, the model-based cumulative risks after eight screens was 45.1% in BCSC, 9.6% in Copenhagen, and 8.8% in Funen. Using the Njor method, these risks were estimated to be 43.6, 10.9 and 8.0%. Conclusion: Choice of statistical method, screening interval and mammogram type does not explain the substantial differences in cumulative false-positive risk between the US and Europe. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:656 / 663
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Risk of false-positive result in mammography screening in Brazil
    Santos, Renata Oliveira Maciel dos
    de Assis, Monica
    Dias, Maria Beatriz Kneipp
    Tomazelli, Jeane Glaucia
    CADERNOS DE SAUDE PUBLICA, 2023, 39 (05):
  • [2] Modelling the cumulative risk of a false-positive screening test
    Hubbard, Rebecca A.
    Miglioretti, Diana L.
    Smith, Robert A.
    STATISTICAL METHODS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2010, 19 (05) : 429 - 449
  • [3] Better safe than sorry: a long-term perspective on experiences with a false-positive screening mammography in Denmark
    Lindberg, Laura Glahder
    Svendsen, Mette
    Domgaard, Mikala
    Brodersen, John
    HEALTH RISK & SOCIETY, 2013, 15 (08) : 699 - 716
  • [4] The cumulative risk of false-positive screening results across screening centres in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program
    Roman, M.
    Skaane, P.
    Hofvind, S.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2014, 83 (09) : 1639 - 1644
  • [5] Effect of radiologist experience on the risk of false-positive results in breast cancer screening programs
    Zubizarreta Alberdi, Raquel
    Fernandez Llanes, Ana B.
    Almazan Ortega, Raquel
    Roman Exposito, Ruban
    Velarde Collado, Jose M.
    Queiro Verdes, Teresa
    Natal Ramos, Carmen
    Ederra Sanz, Maria
    Salas Trejo, Dolores
    Castells Oliveres, Xavier
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2011, 21 (10) : 2083 - 2090
  • [6] Risk of Breast Cancer After False-Positive Test Results in Screening Mammography
    von Euler-Chelpin, My
    Risor, Louise Madeleine
    Thorsted, Brian Larsen
    Vejborg, Ilse
    JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2012, 104 (09): : 682 - 689
  • [7] The Cumulative Risk of False-Positive Results in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program: Updated Results
    Roman, Marta
    Hubbard, Rebecca A.
    Sebuodegard, Sofie
    Miglioretti, Diana L.
    Castells, Xavier
    Hofvind, Solveig
    CANCER, 2013, 119 (22) : 3952 - 3958
  • [8] Long-Term Psychosocial Consequences of False-Positive Screening Mammography
    Brodersen, John
    Siersma, Volkert Dirk
    ANNALS OF FAMILY MEDICINE, 2013, 11 (02) : 106 - 115
  • [9] Cumulative Incidence of False-Positive Results in Repeated, Multimodal Cancer Screening
    Croswell, Jennifer Miller
    Kramer, Barnett S.
    Kreimer, Aimee R.
    Prorok, Phil C.
    Xu, Jian-Lun
    Baker, Stuart G.
    Fagerstrom, Richard
    Riley, Thomas L.
    Clapp, Jonathan D.
    Berg, Christine D.
    Gohagan, John K.
    Andriole, Gerald L.
    Chia, David
    Church, Timothy R.
    Crawford, E. David
    Fouad, Mona N.
    Gelmann, Edward P.
    Lamerato, Lois
    Reding, Douglas J.
    Schoen, Robert E.
    ANNALS OF FAMILY MEDICINE, 2009, 7 (03) : 212 - 222
  • [10] A model of the influence of false-positive mammography screening results on subsequent screening
    DeFrank, Jessica T.
    Brewer, Noel
    HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW, 2010, 4 (02) : 112 - 127