Cost-effectiveness of different reading and referral strategies in mammography screening in the Netherlands

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

Volumn 102, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 211-218

  Groenewoud, J H ^a   Otten, J D M ^b   Fracheboud, J ^a   Draisma, G ^a   Van Ineveld, B M ^a   Holland, R ^c   Verbeek, A L M ^b,c   De Koning, H J ^a  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

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

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Cost effectiveness; Double reading; Referral strategy; Screening

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH SERVICE; HUMAN; NETHERLANDS; PATIENT REFERRAL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGIST; TUMOR BIOPSY;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; COHORT STUDIES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; NETHERLANDS; OBSERVER VARIATION; REFERRAL AND CONSULTATION; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 33947402720     PISSN: 01676806     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10549-006-9319-4     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Fracheboud J, de Koning HJ, Boer R, Groenewoud JH, Verbeek AL, Broeders MJ, van Ineveld BM, Hendriks JH, de Bruyn AE, Holland R, van der Maas PJ (2001) Nationwide breast cancer screening programme fully implemented in The Netherlands. Breast 10(1):6-11
2. Duijm LE, Groenewoud JH, Hendriks JH, de Koning HJ (2004) Independent double reading of screening mammograms in The Netherlands: effect of arbitration following reader disagreements. Radiology 231(2):564-570
3. Uitspraak Medisch Tuchtcollege 's-Gravenhage (1998) Verdict Medical Disciplinary Board 's-Gravenhage [in Dutch]. Med Contact 53:661-662
4. Uitspraak Medisch Tuchtcollege 's-Gravenhage (1998) Verdict Medical Disciplinary Board 's-Gravenhage [in Dutch]. Staatscourant 20-21
5. Boer R, de Koning H, van Oortmarssen G, Warmerdam P, van der Maas P (1999) Stage distribution at first and repeat examinations in breast cancer screening. J Med Screen 6(3):132-138
6. Otten JD, Karssemeijer N, Hendriks JH, Groenewoud JH, Fracheboud J, Verbeek AL, de Koning HJ, Holland R (2005) Effect of recall rate on earlier screen detection of breast cancers based on the Dutch performance indicators. J Natl Cancer Inst 97(10):748-754
7. van den Akker-van Marle E, de Koning H, Boer R, van der Maas P (1999) Reduction in breast cancer mortality due to the introduction of mass screening in the Netherlands: comparison with the United Kingdom. J Med Screen 6(1):30-34
8. de Koning HJ, Fracheboud J, Boer R, Verbeek AL, Collette HJ, Hendriks JH, van Ineveld BM, de Bruyn AE, van der Maas PJ (1995) Nation-wide breast cancer screening in The Netherlands: support for breast-cancer mortality reduction. National Evaluation Team for Breast Cancer Screening (NETB). Int J Cancer 60(6):777-780
9. Groenewoud JH, Pijnappel RM, van den Akker-Van Marle ME, Birnie E, Buijs-van der Woude T, Mali WP, de Koning HJ, Buskens E (2004) Cost-effectiveness of stereotactic large-core needle biopsy for nonpalpable breast lesions compared to open-breast biopsy. Br J Cancer 90(2):383-392
10. Rijnsburger AJ, Essink-Bot ML, van Dooren S, Borsboom GJ, Seynaeve C, Bartels CC, Klijn JG, Tibben A, de Koning HJ (2004) Impact of screening for breast cancer in high-risk women on health-related quality of life. Br J Cancer 91(1):69-76
11. Nyström L, Rutqvist LE, Wall S, Lindgren A, Lindqvist M, Rydén S, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, Fagerberg G, Frisell J, Tabár L, Larsson LG (1993) Breast cancer screening with mammography: overview of Swedish randomised trials. Lancet 341(8851):973-978
12. Denton ER, Field S (1997) Just how valuable is double reporting in screening mammography? Clin Radiol 52:466-468
13. Séradour B, Wait S, Jacquemier J, Dubuc M (1996) Dual reading in a non-specialized breast cancer screening programme. Breast 5:398-403
14. Anderson ED, Muir BB, Walsh JS, Kirkpatrick AE (1994) The efficacy of double reading mammograms in breast screening. Clin Radiol 49:248-251
15. Thurfjell EL, Lernevall KA, Taube AA (1994) Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program. Radiology 191:241-244
16. Brown J, Bryan S, Warren R (1996) Mammography screening: an incremental cost effectiveness analysis of double versus single reading of mammograms. BMJ 312:809-812
17. Warren RM, Duffy SW (1995) Comparison of single reading with double reading of mammograms, and change in effectiveness with experience. Br J Radiol 68(813):958-962
18. Anttinen I, Pamilo M, Soiva M, Roiha M (1993) Double reading of mammography screening films - one radiologist or two? Clin Radiol 48:414-421
19. Ciatto S, Ambrogetti D, Bonardi R, Catarzi S, Risso G, Rosselli Del Turco M, Mantellini P (2005) Second reading of screening mammograms increases cancer detection and recall rates. Results in the Florence screening programme. J Med Screen 12(2):103-106
20. Pauli R, Hammond S, Cooke J, Ansell J (1996) Comparison of radiographer/radiologist double film reading with single reading in breast cancer screening. J Med Screen 3(1):18-22
21. Blanks RG, Wallis MG, Moss SM (1998) A comparison of cancer detection rates achieved by breast cancer screening programmes by number of readers, for one and two view mammography: results from the UK National Health Service breast screening programme. J Med Screen 5(4):195-201
22. Ciatto S, Ambrogetti D, Risso G, Catarzi S, Morrone D, Mantellini P, Rosselli Del Turco M (2005) The role of arbitration of discordant reports at double reading of screening mammograms. J Med Screen 12:125-127