A study on effectiveness of screening mammograms

被引:14
|
作者
Ren, JJ [1 ]
Peer, PGM
机构
[1] Tulane Univ, Dept Math, New Orleans, LA 70118 USA
[2] Univ Nijmegen, Dept Med Stat, NL-6500 HB Nijmegen, Netherlands
关键词
bootstrap; breast cancer; doubly censored data; screening mammograms;
D O I
10.1093/ije/29.5.803
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Background So far, no randomized controlled trials with a mean mammographic screening interval of greater than or equal to2 years has demonstrated statistically significant mortality reduction for women younger than age 50. The issue of screening frequency is vital in detection of primary breast cancer. Methods The study group consisted of cancers diagnosed in women who participated in a serial screening programme with a mean screening interval of 2 years. To study the effectiveness of the screening, a comparison is made between the distribution of age at which the tumour could be detected when biennial mammographic screening is the only detection method, and the distribution of age at which the tumour would be detected by either biennial mammographic screening or the development of symptoms. Some recently developed statistic methods, such as bootstrap, the maximum likelihood distribution estimator for doubly censored data and the EM algorithm, are used in estimation of these distributions. Results The hypothesis tests and confidence intervals show that the difference between the two distributions was statistically significant for women younger than 50 and 50-70 years old, but not for women over 70 years. Conclusions The statistical analysis indicates that for women younger than 50, and 50-70 years of age, a screening mammogram every other year is not frequent enough to detect primary breast cancer, but for women over 70 years, it might be sufficient.
引用
收藏
页码:803 / 806
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] THE EFFICACY OF DOUBLE READING MAMMOGRAMS IN BREAST SCREENING
    ANDERSON, EDC
    MUIR, BB
    WALSH, JS
    KIRKPATRICK, AE
    CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 1994, 49 (04) : 248 - 251
  • [32] Re: Can radiographers read screening mammograms?
    Spencer, N
    CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 2003, 58 (11) : 902 - 902
  • [33] Consequences of False-Positive Screening Mammograms
    Tosteson, Anna N. A.
    Fryback, Dennis G.
    Hammond, Cristina S.
    Hanna, Lucy G.
    Grove, Margaret R.
    Brown, Mary
    Wang, Qianfei
    Lindfors, Karen
    Pisano, Etta D.
    JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2014, 174 (06) : 954 - 961
  • [34] AI for reading screening mammograms: the need for circumspection
    Autier, Philippe
    Burrion, Jean-Benoit
    Grivegnee, Andre-Robert
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2020, 30 (09) : 4783 - 4784
  • [35] TECHNICIANS COULD BE TRAINED TO INTERPRET SCREENING MAMMOGRAMS
    ROBERTSON, M
    BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1995, 310 (6985): : 1003 - 1003
  • [36] Can radiographers reliably read screening mammograms?
    G Wivell
    I Harvey
    J Curtin
    E Denton
    Breast Cancer Research, 2 (Suppl 2)
  • [37] Fatigue and performance in interpreting breast screening mammograms
    Taylor-Phillips, S.
    Clarke, A.
    Wheaton, M.
    Kearins, O.
    Wallis, M.
    BREAST CANCER RESEARCH, 2012, 14
  • [38] Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists
    Shile, PE
    Pilgram, TK
    ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 1996, 3 (10) : 879 - 881
  • [39] True and Missed Interval Cancer in Organized Mammographic Screening: A Retrospective Review Study of Diagnostic and Prior Screening Mammograms
    Hovda, Tone
    Hoff, Solveig Roth
    Larsen, Marthe
    Romundstad, Linda
    Sahlberg, Kristine Kleivi
    Hofvind, Solveig
    ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2022, 29 : S180 - S191
  • [40] Agreement Between Radiologists' Interpretations of Screening Mammograms
    Nishikawa, Robert M.
    Comstock, Christopher E.
    Linver, Michael N.
    Newstead, Gillian M.
    Sandhir, Vinay
    Schmidt, Robert A.
    BREAST IMAGING, IWDM 2016, 2016, 9699 : 3 - 10