The cumulative risk of false-positive Results in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program: Updated Results

Cancer

Volumn 119, Issue 22, 2013, Pages 3952-3958

  Roman, Marta ^a,b   Hubbard, Rebecca A ^c,d   Sebuodegard, Sofie ^e   Miglioretti, Diana L ^c,f   Castells, Xavier ^a,b   Hofvind, Solveig ^e,g  

^a HOSPITAL DEL MAR   (Spain)

^b Network for Research into Healthcare in Chronic Diseases   (Spain)

^c GROUP HEALTH RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^e Cancer Registry of Norway ^*  (Norway)

^f UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^g OSLO METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY   (Norway)

Author keywords

breast neoplasms; false positive Results; female; mammography; mass screening

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CANCER; CANCER SCREENING; COHORT ANALYSIS; CORE NEEDLE BIOPSY; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; FINE NEEDLE ASPIRATION BIOPSY; HUMAN; INVASIVE PROCEDURE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; NEEDLE BIOPSY; NORWAY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; RISK ASSESSMENT;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; FALSE-POSITIVE RESULTS; FEMALE; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING;

AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; COHORT STUDIES; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; NORWAY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK;

EID: 84887048038     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: 10970142     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.28320     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Brett J, Bankhead C, Henderson B, et al. The psychological impact of mammographic screening. A systematic review. Psychooncology. 2005; 14: 917-938.
2. Bull AR, Campbell MJ,. Assessment of the psychological impact of a breast screening programme. Br J Radiol. 1991; 64: 510-515.
3. Lerman C, Trock B, Rimer BK, et al. Psychological and behavioral implications of abnormal mammograms. Ann Intern Med. 1991; 114: 657-661.
4. Brewer NT, Salz T, Lillie SE,. Systematic review: the long-term effects of false-positive mammograms. Ann Intern Med. 2007; 146: 502-510.
5. Roman R, Sala M, De la Vega M, et al. Effect of false-positives and women's characteristics on long-term adherence to breast cancer screening. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011; 130: 543-552.
6. Hofvind S, Ponti A, Patnick J, et al. False-positive Results in mammographic screening for breast cancer in Europe: a literature review and survey of service screening programmes. J Med Screen. 2012; 19 (suppl 1): 57-66.
7. Christiansen CL, Wang F, Barton MB, et al. Predicting the cumulative risk of false-positive mammograms. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000; 92: 1657-1666.
8. Elmore JG, Barton MB, Moceri VM, et al. Ten-year risk of false positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations. N Engl J Med. 1998; 338: 1089-1096.
9. Hubbard RA, Kerlikowske K, Flowers CI, et al. Cumulative probability of false-positive recall or biopsy recommendation after 10 years of screening mammography: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2011; 155: 481-492.
10. Smith-Bindman R, Ballard-Barbash R, Miglioretti DL, et al. Comparing the performance of mammography screening in the USA and the UK. J Med Screen. 2005; 12: 50-54.
11. Hofvind S, Thoresen S, Tretli S,. The cumulative risk of a false-positive recall in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program. Cancer. 2004; 101: 1501-1507.
12. Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, et al. European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities; 2006.
13. Hofvind S, Geller BM, Skelly J, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of mammographic screening as practised in Vermont and Norway. Br J Radiol. 2012; 85: e1226-e1232.
14. Singer JD, Willett JB,. Fitting basic discrete-time hazard models. In: Applied Longitudinal Data Analysis: Modelling Change and Event Occurrence. New York: Oxford University Press; 2003: 357-467.
15. Singer JD, Willett JB,. Describing discrete-time event occurrence data. In: Applied Longitudinal Data Analysis: Modelling Change and Event Occurrence. New York: Oxford University Press; 2003: 325-356.
16. Hubbard RA, Miglioretti DL, Smith RA,. Modelling the cumulative risk of a false-positive screening test. Stat Methods Med Res. 2010; 19: 429-449.
17. Njor SH, Olsen AH, Schwartz W, et al. Predicting the risk of a false-positive test for women following a mammography screening programme. J Med Screen. 2007; 14: 94-97.
18. Roman R, Sala M, Salas D, et al. Effect of protocol-related variables and women's characteristics on the cumulative false-positive risk in breast cancer screening. Ann Oncol. 2012; 23: 104-111.
19. Puliti D, Miccinesi G, Zappa M,. More on screening mammography. N Engl J Med. 2011; 364: 284-285.
20. Elmore JG, Nakano CY, Koepsell TD, et al. International variation in screening mammography interpretations in community-based programs. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003; 95: 1384-1393.
21. Hofvind S, Vacek PM, Skelly J, et al. Comparing screening mammography for early breast cancer detection in Vermont and Norway. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008; 100: 1082-1091.
22. Yankaskas BC, Klabunde CN, Ancelle-Park R, et al. International comparison of performance measures for screening mammography: can it be done? J Med Screen. 2004; 11: 187-193.
23. Sickles EA, Wolverton DE, Dee KE,. Performance parameters for screening and diagnostic mammography: specialist and general radiologists. Radiology. 2002; 224: 861-869.
24. Hofvind S, Geller BM, Rosenberg RD, et al. Screening-detected breast cancers: discordant independent double reading in a population-based screening program. Radiology. 2009; 253: 652-660.
25. Carney PA, Sickles EA, Monsees BS, et al. Identifying minimally acceptable interpretive performance criteria for screening mammography. Radiology. 2010; 255: 354-361.
26. Dick JF, Gallagher TH, Brenner RJ, et al. Predictors of radiologists' perceived risk of malpractice lawsuits in breast imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009; 192: 327-333.
27. Elmore JG, Taplin SH, Barlow WE, et al. Does litigation influence medical practice? The influence of community radiologists' medical malpractice perceptions and experience on screening mammography. Radiology. 2005; 236: 37-46.
28. Thurfjell MG, Vitak B, Azavedo E, et al. Effect on sensitivity and specificity of mammography screening with or without comparison of old mammograms. Acta Radiol. 2000; 41: 52-56.
29. Globocan 2008. Estimated Breast Cancer Incidence Worldwide in 2008. globocan.iarc.fr/factsheets/cancers/breast.asp. Accessed August 3, 2013.
30. Brett J, Austoker J,. Women who are recalled for further investigation for breast screening: psychological consequences 3 years after recall and factors affecting re-attendance. J Public Health Med. 2001; 23: 292-300.
31. von Euler-Chelpin M, Risor LM, Thorsted BL, et al. Risk of breast cancer after false-positive test Results in screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012; 104: 682-689.
32. Xu JL, Fagerstrom RM, Prorok PC, et al. Estimating the cumulative risk of a false-positive test in a repeated screening program. Biometrics. 2004; 60: 651-660.