A model-based comparison of breast cancer screening strategies: Mammograms and clinical breast examinations

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 529-532

  Shen, Yu ^a   Parmigiani, Giovanni ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST EXAMINATION; CANCER SCREENING; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PALPATION; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS;

EID: 13944272250     PISSN: 10559965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-04-0499     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Fletcher SW, Elmore JG. Mammographic screening for breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2003;348:1672-80.
2. Wang L. Mammography and beyond: building better breast cancer screening tests. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:1346-7.
3. National Cancer Institute. NCI statement on mammography screening. Available from: http://www.nci.nih.gov/newscenter/mammstatement31-jan02;2002.
4. Michaelson J, Halpern E, Kopans D. Breast cancer: computer simulation method for estimating optimal intervals for screening. Radiology 1999; 212:551-60.
5. De Koning H. Breast cancer screening cost-effectiveness in practice. Eur J Radiol 2000;33:32-7.
6. Lindfors KK, Rosenquist CJ. The cost effectiveness of mammographic screening strategies. J Am Med Assoc 1995;274:881-4.
7. Brown ML. Sensitivity analysis in the cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening. Cancer 1992;69:1963-7.
8. Mushlin AI, Fintor L. Is screening for breast cancer cost-effective? Cancer 1992;69:1957-62.
9. van Ineveld BM, van Oortmarssen GJ, de Koning HJ, Boer R, van der Maas PJ. How cost-effective is breast cancer screening in different EC countries? Eur J Cancer 1993;29:1663-8.
10. Brown ML, Fintor L. Cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening: preliminary results of a systematic review of the literature. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1993;25:113-8.
11. Elixhauser A. Costs of breast cancer and the cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1991;7:604-15.
12. Clark RA. Economic issues in screening mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1992;158:527-34.
13. Parmigiani G, Kamlet M. Cost-utility analysis of alternative strategies in screening for breast cancer. In: Gatsonis C, Hodges J, Kass RE, Singpurwalla N, editors. Case studies in Bayesian statistics. New York: Springer; 1993. p. 390-402.
14. Eddy DM, Hasselblad V, McGivney W, Hendee W. The value of mammography screening in women under age 50 years. JAMA 1989;259:1512-9.
15. Carter R, Glasziou P, van Oortmarssen G, et al. Cost-effectiveness of mammographic screening in Australia. Aust J Public Health 1993;17:42-50.
16. Saltzmann P, Kerlikowske K, Phillips K. Cost effectiveness of extending screening mammography guidelines to include women 40 to 49 years of age. Ann Intern Med 1997;127:955-65.
17. Burnside E, Belkora J, Esserman L. The impact of alternative practices on the cost and quality of mammographic screening in the United States. Clin Breast Cancer 2001;2:145-52.
18. Fett M. Computer modelling of the Swedish two county trial of mammographic screening and trade-offs between participation screening interval. J Med Screen 2001;8:39-45.
19. Yasmeen S, Romano P, Pettinger M, et al. Frequency and predictive value of a mammographic recommendation for short-interval follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:429-36.
20. Kerlikowske K, Smith-Bindman R, Sickles E. Short-interval follow-up mammography: are we doing the right thing? J Natl Cancer Inst 2003; 95:418-9.
21. Shapiro S. Periodic screening for breast cancer: The HIP randomized controlled trial. Monogr Natl Cancer Inst 1997;22:27-30.
22. Miller A, To T, Baines C, Wall C. The Canadian National Breast Screening Study: update on breast cancer mortality. Monogr Natl Cancer Inst 1997;22:37-41.
23. UK Trial of Early Detection of Breast Cancer Group. First results on mortality reduction in the UK trial of early detection of breast cancer. Lancet 1988;2:411-6.
24. Barton MB, Harris R, Fletcher SW. Does this patient have breast cancer? The screening clinical breast examination: Should it be done? How? JAMA 1999;282:1270-80.
25. Baines CJ, Miller AB, Bassett AA. Physical examination. Its role as a single screening modality in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study. Cancer 1989;63:1816-22.
26. Bobo J, Lee N, Thames SF. Findings from 752081 clinical breast examinations reported to a national screening program from 1995 through 1998. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:971-6.
27. Shen Y, Zelen M. Screening sensitivity and sojourn time from breast cancer early detection clinical trials: mammograms and physical examinations. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:3490-9.
28. Shen Y, Wu D, Zelen M. Testing the independence of two diagnostic tests. Biometrics 2001;57:1009-17.
29. Peer P, Verbeek A, Straatman H, Hendriks J, Holland R. Age-specific sensitivities of mammographic screening for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1996;38:153-60.
30. Weiss N, Etzioni R. Estimating the influence of rescreening interval on the benefits associated with cancer screening: approaches and limitations. Epidemiology 2002;13:713-7.
31. Parmigiani G. On optimal screening ages. J Am Stat Assoc 1993;88:622-8.
32. Parmigiani G. Modeling in medical decision making. Chichester (United Kingdom): Wiley; 2002.
33. Elmore JG, Barton MB, Moceri VM, Polk S, Arena PJ, Fletcher SW. Ten-year risk of false positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations. N Engl J Med 1998;338:1089-96.
34. Kessler L, Andersen M, Etzioni R. Much ado about mammography variability. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:1346-7.
35. Parmigiani G, Berry DA, Winer EP, Tebaldi C, Iglehart JD, Prosnitz L. Is axillary lymph node dissection indicated for early stage breast cancer? A decision analysis. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:1465-73.
36. Shen Y, Parmigiani G. Optimization of breast cancer screening strategies. In: Nikoulina M, Commenges D, editors. Probability, Statistics and Modeling in Public Health. New York: Springer; In press.
37. Parmigiani G, Skates S. Estimating the age of onset of detectable asymptomatic cancer. Math Comput Model 2001;33:1347-60.
38. Moolgavkar SH, Stevens RG, Lee JAH. Effect of age on incidence of breast cancer in females. J Natl Cancer Inst 1979;62:493-501.
39. Shen Y, Zelen M. Parametric estimation procedures for screening programmes: stable and nonstable disease models for multimodality case finding. Biometrika 1999;86:503-15.
40. Spratt JS, Greenberg RA, Heuser LS. Geometry, growth rates, and duration of cancer and carcinoma in situ of the breast before detection by screening. Cancer Res 1986;46:970-4.
41. Peer P, van Dijck JAAM, Hendriks J, Holland R, Verbeek ALM. Age-dependent growth rate of primary breast cancer. Cancer 1993;71:3547-51.
42. Beam G, Conant E, Sickles E. Association of volume and volume-independent factors with accuracy in screening mammogram interpretation. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:282-90.
43. Nystrom L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, Frisell J, Nordenskjold B, Rutqvist L. Long-term effects of mammograph screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet 2002;395:909-19.
44. Wood W, Weiss R, Tormey D, et al. A randomized trial of CMF versus CMFVP as adjuvant chemotherapy in women with node-positive stage II breast cancer: a CALGB study. World J Surg 1985;9:714-8.
45. Perloff M, Norton L, Korzun A, et al. Postsurgical adjuvant chemotherapy of stage II breast carcinoma with or without crossover to a non-cross-resistant regimen: a Cancer and Leukemia Group B study. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:1589-98.
46. Wood W, Budman D, Korzun A, et al. Dose and dose intensity of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II, node-positive breast carcinoma. N Engl J Med 1994;330:1253-9.