Interval Breast Cancer Rates and Histopathologic Tumor Characteristics after False-Positive Findings at Mammography in a Population-based Screening Program

被引:34
作者
Hofvind, Solveig [1 ]
Sagstad, Silje [1 ]
Sebuodegard, Sofie [1 ]
Chen, Ying [2 ]
Roman, Marta [3 ]
Lee, Christoph I. [4 ]
机构
[1] Canc Registry Norway, PO 5313 Majorstuen, N-0304 Oslo, Norway
[2] Akershus Univ Sykehus HF, Dept Pathol, Lorenskog, Norway
[3] Hosp del Mar, Med Res Inst, Dept Epidemiol & Evaluat, Barcelona, Spain
[4] Univ Washington, Dept Radiol, Seattle Canc Care Alliance, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
关键词
FIELD DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; MISSED INTERVAL; RISK; TOMOSYNTHESIS; PERFORMANCE; SURVIVAL; NORWAY; WOMEN; OUTCOMES; SWEDEN;
D O I
10.1148/radiol.2017162159
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
Purpose: To compare rates and tumor characteristics of interval breast cancers (IBCs) detected after a negative versus false-positive screening among women participating in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program. Materials and Methods: The Cancer Registry Regulation approved this retrospective study. Information about 423 445 women aged 49-71 years who underwent 789 481 full-field digital mammographic screening examinations during 2004-2012 was extracted from the Cancer Registry of Norway. Rates and odds ratios of IBC among women with a negative (the reference group) versus a false-positive screening were estimated by using logistic regression models adjusted for age at diagnosis and county of residence. Results: A total of 1302 IBCs were diagnosed after 789 481 screening examinations, of which 7.0% (91 of 1302) were detected among women with a false-positive screening as the most recent breast imaging examination before detection. By using negative screening as the reference, adjusted odds ratios of IBCs were 3.3 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.6, 4.2) and 2.8 (95% CI: 1.8, 4.4) for women with a false-positive screening without and with needle biopsy, respectively. Women with a previous negative screening had a significantly lower proportion of tumors that were 10 mm or less (14.3% [150 of 1049] vs 50.0% [seven of 14], respectively; P<.01) and grade I tumors (13.2% [147 of 1114] vs 42.9% [six of 14]; P<.01), but a higher proportion of cases with lymph nodes positive for cancer (40.9% [442 of 1080] vs 13.3% [two of 15], respectively; P=.03) compared with women with a previous false-positive screening with benign biopsy. A retrospective review of the screening mammographic examinations identified 42.9% (39 of 91) of the false-positive cases to be the same lesion as the IBC. Conclusion: By using a negative screening as the reference, a false-positive screening examination increased the risk of an IBC threefold. The tumor characteristics of IBC after a negative screening were less favorable compared with those detected after a previous false-positive screening.
引用
收藏
页码:58 / 67
页数:10
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2013, ACR BIRADS ATLAS BR
[2]   Interval cancers in the NHS breast cancer screening programme in England, Wales and Northern Ireland [J].
Bennett, R. L. ;
Sellars, S. J. ;
Moss, S. M. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2011, 104 (04) :571-577
[3]   Survival from invasive breast cancer among interval cases in the mammography screening programmes of northern Sweden [J].
Bordas, P. ;
Jonsson, H. ;
Nystroem, L. ;
Lenner, P. .
BREAST, 2007, 16 (01) :47-54
[4]   Methodological issues in international comparison of interval breast cancers [J].
Bulliard, Jean-Luc ;
Sasieni, Peter ;
Klabunde, Carrie ;
De Landtsheer, Jean-Pierre ;
Yankaskas, Bonnie C. ;
Fracheboud, Jacques .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2006, 119 (05) :1158-1163
[5]   Interval breast cancers: Absolute and proportional incidence and blinded review in a community mammographic screening program [J].
Carbonaro, Luca A. ;
Azzarone, Antonio ;
Paskeh, Bijan Babaei ;
Brambilla, Giorgio ;
Brunelli, Silvia ;
Calori, Anna ;
Caumo, Francesca ;
Malerba, Paolo ;
Menicagli, Laura ;
Sconfienza, Luca M. ;
Vadala, Giuseppe ;
Brambilla, Gelma ;
Fantini, Luigi ;
Ciatto, Stefano ;
Sardanelli, Francesco .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2014, 83 (02) :E84-E91
[6]   Risk of Breast Cancer in Women with False-Positive Results according to Mammographic Features [J].
Castells, Xavier ;
Tora-Rocamora, Isabel ;
Posso, Margarita ;
Roman, Marta ;
Vernet-Tomas, Maria ;
Rodriguez-Arana, Ana ;
Domingo, Laia ;
Vidal, Carmen ;
Bare, Marisa ;
Ferrer, Joana ;
Jesus Quintana, Maria ;
Sanchez, Mar ;
Natal, Carmen ;
Espinas, Josep A. ;
Saladie, Francina ;
Sala, Maria .
RADIOLOGY, 2016, 280 (02) :379-386
[7]   Mammographic density and survival in interval breast cancers [J].
Eriksson, Louise ;
Czene, Kamila ;
Rosenberg, Lena U. ;
Tornberg, Sven ;
Humphreys, Keith ;
Hall, Per .
BREAST CANCER RESEARCH, 2013, 15 (03)
[8]   Interval cancers in the Dutch breast cancer screening programme [J].
Fracheboud, J ;
de Koning, HJ ;
Beemsterboer, PMM ;
Boer, R ;
Verbeek, ALM ;
Hendriks, JHCL ;
van Ineveld, BM ;
Broeders, MJM ;
de Bruyn, AE ;
van der Maas, PJ .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 1999, 81 (05) :912-917
[9]   Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT): a review of the evidence for use as a screening tool [J].
Gilbert, Fiona J. ;
Tucker, Lorraine ;
Young, Ken C. .
CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 2016, 71 (02) :141-150
[10]   Increased Risk of Developing Breast Cancer after a False-Positive Screening Mammogram [J].
Henderson, Louise M. ;
Hubbard, Rebecca A. ;
Sprague, Brian L. ;
Zhu, Weiwei ;
Kerlikowske, Karla .
CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION, 2015, 24 (12) :1882-1889