Characteristics and screening outcome of women referred twice at screening mammography

被引:2
作者
Setz-Pels, Wikke [1 ]
Duijm, Lucien E. M. [1 ]
Louwman, Marieke W. J. [2 ]
Roumen, Rudi M. H. [3 ]
Jansen, Frits H. [1 ]
Voogd, Adri C. [2 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Catharina Hosp, Dept Radiol, NL-5602 ZA Eindhoven, Netherlands
[2] Eindhoven Canc Registry, Comprehens Canc Ctr S IKZ, NL-5600 AE Eindhoven, Netherlands
[3] Maxima Med Ctr, Dept Surg, NL-5500 MB Veldhoven, Netherlands
[4] Maastricht Univ, Dept Epidemiol, NL-6200 MD Maastricht, Netherlands
关键词
Breast cancer; Screening mammography; False positive; Cancer risk; Referral; NONPALPABLE BREAST-LESIONS; NEEDLE-ASPIRATION BIOPSY; CANCER; NETHERLANDS; RECALL; DELAY; DIAGNOSIS; BEHAVIOR; SERIES; RISK;
D O I
10.1007/s00330-012-2523-1
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Objectives To determine the characteristics and screening outcome of women referred twice at screening mammography. Methods We included 424,703 consecutive screening mammograms and collected imaging, biopsy and surgery reports of women with screen-detected breast cancer. Review of screening mammograms was performed to determine whether or not an initial and second referral comprised the same lesion. Results The overall positive predictive value of referral for cancer was 38.6% (95% CI 37.3-39.8%). Of 147 (2.6%) women referred twice, 86 had been referred for a different lesion at second referral and 32 of these proved malignant (37.2%, 95% CI 27.0-47.4%). Sixty-one women had been referred twice for the same lesion, of which 22 proved malignant (36.1%, 95% CI 24.1-48.0%). Characteristics of these women were comparable to women with cancer diagnosed after first referral. Compared with women without cancer at second referral for the same lesion, women with cancer more frequently showed suspicious densities at screening mammography (86.4% vs 53.8%, P = 0.02) and work-up at first referral had less frequently included biopsy (22.7% vs 61.5%, P = 0.004). Conclusions Cancer risk in women referred twice for the same lesion is similar to that observed in women referred once, or referred for a second time but for a different lesion. Key Points . Cancer risk was 36% for lesions referred twice at screening mammography . The cancer risk was similar for lesions referred only once at screening . Densities at first referral were associated with increased cancer risk at second referral . No biopsy at first referral was associated with increased cancer risk at second referral . Patient and tumour characteristics were similar for women with and without diagnostic delay.
引用
收藏
页码:2624 / 2632
页数:9
相关论文
共 35 条
[1]   Participation behaviour following a false positive test in the Copenhagen mammography screening programme [J].
Andersen, Sune Bangsboll ;
Vejborg, Ilse ;
Von Euler-Chelpin, My .
ACTA ONCOLOGICA, 2008, 47 (04) :550-555
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2009, ANN REP BOZ BEV OND
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2003, BREAST IM REP DAT SY
[4]  
Arisio R, 1998, DIAGN CYTOPATHOL, V18, P462, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0339(199806)18:6<462::AID-DC16>3.0.CO
[5]  
2-F
[6]   Systematic review: The long-term effects of false-positive mammograms [J].
Brewer, Noel T. ;
Salz, Talya ;
Lillie, Sarah E. .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2007, 146 (07) :502-510
[7]   Minority report - false negative breast assessment in women recalled for suspicious screening mammography: imaging and pathological features, and associated delay in diagnosis [J].
Ciatto, S. ;
Houssami, N. ;
Ambrogetti, D. ;
Bonardi, R. ;
Collini, G. ;
Del Turco, M. Rosselli .
BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2007, 105 (01) :37-43
[8]  
Ciatto S, 1997, ACTA RADIOL, V38, P815
[9]   Breast and cervical cancer screening programme implementation in 16 countries [J].
Dowling, Emily C. ;
Klabunde, Carrie ;
Patnick, Julietta ;
Ballard-Barbash, Rachel .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCREENING, 2010, 17 (03) :139-146
[10]   Mammography screening in the Netherlands: delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer after breast cancer screening [J].
Duijm, LEM ;
Groenewoud, JH ;
Jansen, FH ;
Fracheboud, J ;
van Beek, M ;
de Koning, HJ .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2004, 91 (10) :1795-1799