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] Breast-cancer screening results in worrying number of false-positive results
    Bradbury, J
    LANCET, 1998, 351 (9110): : 1183 - 1183
  • [22] False-positive screening examinations for breast cancer should not destroy confidence in screening
    Beuzard, M
    Hill, C
    M S-MEDECINE SCIENCES, 1999, 15 (02): : 264 - 266
  • [23] Do false-positive screening results affect screening behavior for prostate cancer?
    Jan Adolfsson
    Nature Clinical Practice Urology, 2005, 2 : 272 - 273
  • [24] 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
  • [25] Do false-positive screening results affect screening behavior for prostate cancer?
    Adolfsson, J
    NATURE CLINICAL PRACTICE UROLOGY, 2005, 2 (06): : 272 - 273
  • [26] HIV screening and false-positive results
    Guinn, Debra
    JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2007, 297 (09): : 947 - 947
  • [27] Breast cancer risk is increased in the years following false-positive breast cancer screening
    Goossens, Mathijs C.
    De Brabander, Isabel
    De Greve, Jacques
    Vaes, Evelien
    Van Ongeval, Chantal
    Van Herck, Koen
    Kellen, Eliane
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION, 2017, 26 (05) : 396 - 403
  • [28] Cumulative Incidence of False-Positive Test Results in Lung Cancer Screening A Randomized Trial
    Croswell, Jennifer M.
    Baker, Stuart G.
    Marcus, Pamela M.
    Clapp, Jonathan D.
    Kramer, Barnett S.
    ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2010, 152 (08) : 505 - U53
  • [29] 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
  • [30] False-positive result and reattendance in the Ontario breast screening program
    Chiarelli, AM
    Moravan, V
    Halapy, E
    Majpruz, V
    Mai, V
    Tatla, RK
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCREENING, 2003, 10 (03) : 129 - 133