Effect of recall rate on earlier screen detection of breast cancers based on the Dutch performance indicators

Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Volumn 97, Issue 10, 2005, Pages 748-754

  Otten, Johannes D M ^a   Karssemeijer, Nico ^a   Hendriks, Jan H C L ^b,d   Groenewoud, Johanna H ^c,d   Fracheboud, Jacques ^c,d   Verbeek, André L M ^a,b,d   de Koning, Harry J ^c,d   Holland, Roland ^b,d  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b National Expert and Training Centre for Breast Cancer Screening   (Netherlands)

^c ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^d National Evaluation Team for Breast Cancer Screening   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; NETHERLANDS ANTILLES; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SINGLE BLIND PROCEDURE; TUMOR LOCALIZATION; ARTICLE; BREAST TUMOR; INCIDENCE; INCIDENTAL FINDING; MASS SCREENING; METHODOLOGY; MULTICENTER STUDY; NETHERLANDS; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT REFERRAL; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; RADIOGRAPHY; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STANDARD; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; INCIDENTAL FINDINGS; LINEAR MODELS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; NETHERLANDS; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REFERRAL AND CONSULTATION; RISK ASSESSMENT; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 20544442017     PISSN: 00278874     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jnci/dji131     Document Type: Review

References (15)

1. NETB (National Evaluation Team for Breast Cancer Screening). National evaluation of mass screening for breast cancer in the Netherlands. Evaluation report VII (in Dutch). 1999. Dept. of Public Health, Erasmus University Rotterdam.
2. Boer R, de Koning H, van Oortmarssen G, Warmerdam P, van der Maas P. Stage distribution at first and repeat examinations in breast cancer screening. J Med Screen 1999;6:132-38.
3. Fracheboud J, deKoning HJ, Beemsterboer PMM, Boer R, Hendriks JHCL, Verbeek ALM et al. Nation-wide breast cancer screening in the Netherlands: Results of initial and subsequent screening 1990-1995. Int J Cancer 1998;75:694-98.
4. Use of breast cancer screening. In: Vainio H, Bianchini F, editors. Breast Cancer Screening. Lyon (France): IARCPress; 2002. p. 47-86.
5. Lynge E, Olsen AH, Fracheboud J, Patnick J. Reporting of performance indicators of mammography screening in Europe. Eur J Cancer Prev 2003;12:213-22.
6. Elmore JG, Nakano CY, Koepsell TD, Desnick LM, D'Orsi CJ, Ransohoff DF. International variation in screening mammography interpretations in community-based programs. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:1384-93.
7. Smith-Bindman R, Chu PW, Miglioretti DL, Sickles EA, Blanks R, Ballard-Barbash R, et al. Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United Kingdom. JAMA 2003;290:2129-37.
8. NETB (National Evaluation Team for Breast Cancer Screening). National evaluation of mass screening for breast cancer in the Netherlands. Evaluation report X (in Dutch). 2002. Dept. of Public Health, Erasmus University Rotterdam.
9. Otto SJ, Fracheboud J, Looman CWN, Broeders MJM, Boer R, Hendriks JHCL, et al. Initiation of population-based mammography screening in Dutch municipalities and effect on breast-cancer mortality: a systematic review. Lancet 2003;361:1411-17.
10. Swensson RG. Unified measurement of observer performance in detecting and localizing target objects on images. Med Phys 1996;23:1709-25.
11. Yankaskas BC, Cleveland RJ, Schell MJ, Kozar R. Association of recall rates with sensitivity and positive predictive values of screening mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;177:543-49.S
12. Gur D, Sumkin JH, Hardesty LA, Clearfield RJ, Cohen CS, Ganott MA, et al. Recall and detection rates in screening mammography. A review of clinical experience - implications for practice guidelines. Cancer 2004;100: 1590-4.
13. Karssemeijer N, Otten JD, Verbeek AL, Groenewoud JH, de Koning HJ, Hendriks JH, et al. Computer-aided detection versus independent double reading of masses on mammograms. Radiology 2003;227:192-200.
14. Screening techniques. In: Vainio H, Bianchini F, editors. Breast Cancer Screening. Lyon (France): IARCPress; 2002. p. 25-34.
15. Warren Burhenne LJ, Wood SA, D'Orsi CJ, Feig SA, Kopans DB, O'Shaughnessy KF, et al. Potential contribution of computer-aided detection to the sensitivity of screening mammography. Radiology 2000;215:554-62.