The cumulative risk of false-positive screening results across screening centres in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program

被引:7
|
作者
Roman, M. [1 ,2 ]
Skaane, P. [3 ]
Hofvind, S. [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Canc Registry Norway, N-0403 Oslo, Norway
[2] Oslo Univ Hosp, Dept Women & Childrens Hlth, Oslo, Norway
[3] Univ Oslo, Dept Radiol, Oslo Univ Hosp Ullevaal, Oslo, Norway
[4] Oslo & Akershus Univ, Coll Appl Sci, Fac Hlth Sci, Oslo, Norway
关键词
Breast neoplasms; Mass screening; Mammography; False positive reactions; Predictive value of tests; CORE NEEDLE-BIOPSY; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; FINE-NEEDLE; CONSEQUENCES; PERFORMANCE; ACCURACY; LESIONS; RECALL; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.05.038
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
Background: Recall for assessment in mammographic screening entails an inevitable number of false-positive screening results. This study aimed to investigate the variation in the cumulative risk of a false positive screening result and the positive predictive value across the screening centres in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program. Methods: We studied 618,636 women aged 50-69 years who underwent 2,090,575 screening exams (1996-2010. Recall rate, positive predictive value, rate of screen-detected cancer, and the cumulative risk of a false positive screening result, without and with invasive procedures across the screening centres were calculated. Generalized linear models were used to estimate the probability of a false positive screening result and to compute the cumulative false-positive risk for up to ten biennial screening examinations. Results: The cumulative risk of a false-positive screening exam varied from 10.7% (95% CI: 9.4-12.0%) to 41.5% (95% CI: 34.1-48.9%) across screening centres, with a highest to lowest ratio of 3.9 (95% CI:3.7-4.0). The highest to lowest ratio for the cumulative risk of undergoing an invasive procedure with a benign outcome was 4.3 (95% CI: 4.0-4.6). The positive predictive value of recall varied between 12.0% (95% CI: 11.0-12.9%) and 19.9% (95% CI: 18.3-21.5%), with a highest to lowest ratio of 1.7 (95% CI: 1.5-1.9). Conclusions: A substantial variation in the performance measures across the screening centres in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program was identified, despite of similar administration, procedures, and quality assurance requirements. Differences in the readers' performance is probably of influence for the variability. This results underscore the importance of continuous surveillance of the screening centres and the radiologists in order to sustain and improve the performance and effectiveness of screening programs. (C)2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1639 / 1644
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Association of diagnostic work-up with subsequent attendance in a breast cancer screening program for false-positive cases
    Seigneurin, Arnaud
    Exbrayat, C.
    Labarere, J.
    Delafosse, P.
    Poncet, F.
    Colonna, M.
    BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2011, 127 (01) : 221 - 228
  • [22] The Burden of False-Positive Results in Analog and Digital Screening Mammography: Experience of the Nova Scotia Breast Screening Program
    Payne, Jennifer I.
    Martin, Tetyana
    Caines, Judy S.
    Duggan, Ryan
    CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF RADIOLOGISTS JOURNAL-JOURNAL DE L ASSOCIATION CANADIENNE DES RADIOLOGISTES, 2014, 65 (04): : 315 - 320
  • [23] False-positive screening results in the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer
    Kilpelainen, Thomas P.
    Tammela, Teuvo L. J.
    Roobol, Monique
    Hugosson, Jonas
    Ciatto, Stefano
    Nelen, Vera
    Moss, Sue
    Maattanen, Liisa
    Auvinen, Anssi
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2011, 47 (18) : 2698 - 2705
  • [24] Breast cancer mortality in participants of the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program
    Hofvind, Solveig
    Ursin, Giske
    Tretli, Steinar
    Sebuodegard, Sofie
    Moller, Bjorn
    CANCER, 2013, 119 (17) : 3106 - 3112
  • [25] Breast cancer risk, worry, and anxiety: Effect on patient perceptions of false-positive screening results
    Lee, Janie M.
    Lowry, Kathryn P.
    Chubiz, Jessica E. Cott
    Swan, J. Shannon
    Motazedi, Tina
    Halpern, Elkan F.
    Tosteson, Anna N. A.
    Gazelle, G. Scott
    Donelan, Karen
    BREAST, 2020, 50 : 104 - 112
  • [26] The cumulative false-positive rate in colorectal cancer screening: a Markov analysis
    Haug, Ulrike
    Coupe, Veerle M. H.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY, 2020, 32 (05) : 575 - 580
  • [27] Psychosocial consequences of false-positive results in screening mammography
    El Hachem, Zeina
    Zoghbi, Marouan
    Hallit, Souheil
    JOURNAL OF FAMILY MEDICINE AND PRIMARY CARE, 2019, 8 (02) : 419 - 425
  • [28] The Psychological Impact of a False-Positive Screening Mammogram in Barcelona
    Espasa, Rebecca
    Murta-Nascimento, Cristiane
    Bayes, Ramon
    Sala, Maria
    Casamitjana, Montserrat
    Macia, Francesc
    Castells, Xavier
    JOURNAL OF CANCER EDUCATION, 2012, 27 (04) : 780 - 785
  • [29] 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
  • [30] Effect of false-positive mammograms on interval breast cancer screening in a health maintenance organization
    Burman, ML
    Taplin, SH
    Herta, DF
    Elmore, JG
    ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1999, 131 (01) : 1 - +