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
  • [31] 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
  • [32] Modelling the cumulative risk for a false-positive under repeated screening events
    Gelfand, AE
    Wang, F
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2000, 19 (14) : 1865 - 1879
  • [33] Effect of false-positive results on reattendance at breast cancer screening programmes in Spain
    Alamo-Junquera, Dolores
    Murta-Nascimento, Cristiane
    Macia, Francesc
    Bare, Marisa
    Galceran, Jaume
    Ascunce, Nieves
    Zubizarreta, Raquel
    Salas, Dolores
    Roman, Ruben
    Castells, Xavier
    Sala, Maria
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2012, 22 (03): : 404 - 408
  • [34] 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
  • [35] Breast cancer detection risk in screening mammography after a false-positive result
    Castells, X.
    Roman, M.
    Romero, A.
    Blanch, J.
    Zubizarreta, R.
    Ascunce, N.
    Salas, D.
    Buron, A.
    Sala, M.
    CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2013, 37 (01) : 85 - 90
  • [36] Increased Risk of Developing Breast Cancer after a False-Positive Screening Mammogram
    Henderson, Louise M.
    Hubbard, Rebecca A.
    Sprague, Brian L.
    Zhu, Weiwei
    Kerlikowske, Karla
    CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION, 2015, 24 (12) : 1882 - 1889
  • [37] False-positive results in mammographic screening for breast cancer in Europe: a literature review and survey of service screening programmes
    Hofvind, Solveig
    Ponti, Antonio
    Patnick, Julietta
    Ascunce, Nieves
    Njor, Sisse
    Broeders, Mireille
    Giordano, Livia
    Frigerio, Alfonso
    Tornberg, Sven
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCREENING, 2012, 19 : 57 - 66
  • [38] Effects of false-positive prostate cancer screening results on subsequent prostate cancer screening behavior
    Ford, ME
    Havstad, SL
    Demers, R
    Johnson, CC
    CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION, 2005, 14 (01) : 190 - 194
  • [39] 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
  • [40] HIV screening and false-positive results - Reply
    Gostin, Lawrence O.
    JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2007, 297 (09): : 948 - 948