Performance of digital screening mammography among older women in the United States

Cancer

Volumn 121, Issue 9, 2015, Pages 1379-1386

  Henderson, Louise M ^a   O'Meara, Ellen S ^b   Braithwaite, Dejana ^c   Onega, Tracy ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b GROUP HEALTH RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d DARTMOUTH MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

breast cancer; cancer detection rate; digital mammography; older women; positive predictive value; screening; sensitivity; specificity

Indexed keywords

AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST DENSITY; CANCER GRADING; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER SIZE; CANCER STAGING; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TUMOR INVASION; UNITED STATES; VERY ELDERLY; BREAST TUMOR; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; EVALUATION STUDY; IMAGE QUALITY; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MAMMOGRAPHY; PAGET NIPPLE DISEASE; RADIOGRAPHY;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84928248696     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: 10970142     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.29214     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A,. Cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012; 62: 10-29.
2. American Cancer Society. Breast Cancer Facts & Figures 2013-2014, I. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society; 2013.
3. Crivellari D, Aapro M, Leonard R, et al. Breast cancer in the elderly. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25: 1882-1890.
4. Smith RA, Cokkinides V, Brooks D, Saslow D, Shah M, Brawley OW,. Cancer screening in the United States, 2011: a review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and issues in cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011; 61: 8-30.
5. US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009; 151: 716-726, W-236.
6. National Cancer Institute, Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Screening and Diagnostic Performance, 2009. Available at: http://breastscreening.cancer.gov/data/performance/. Accessed May 27, 2014.
7. Sinclair N, Littenberg B, Geller B, Muss H,. Accuracy of screening mammography in older women. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011; 197: 1268-1273.
8. National Cancer Institute. Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Available at: http://breastscreening.cancer.gov/. Accessed August 5, 2014.
9. D'Orsi CJ, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB, Morris EA,. ACR BI-RADS Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2013.
10. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS). BI-RADS Breast Imaging Atlas. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2003.
11. Rosenberg RD, Yankaskas BC, Hunt WC, et al. Effect of variations in operational definitions on performance estimates for screening mammography. Acad Radiol. 2000; 7: 1058-1068.
12. Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC, et al. Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med. 2003; 138: 168-175.
13. Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, Sickles EA, Ernester V,. Effect of age, breast density, and family history on the sensitivity of first screening mammography. JAMA. 1996; 276: 33-38.
14. Ma L, Fishell E, Wright B, Hanna W, Allan S, Boyd NF,. Case-control study of factors associated with failure to detect breast cancer by mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1992; 84: 781-785.
15. Mandelson MT, Oestreicher N, Porter PL, et al. Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000; 92: 1081-1087.
16. Oestreicher N, Lehman CD, Seger DJ, Buist DS, White E,. The incremental contribution of clinical breast examination to invasive cancer detection in a mammography screening program. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005; 184: 428-432.
17. Rosenberg RD, Hunt WC, Williamson MR, et al. Effects of age, breast density, ethnicity, and estrogen replacement therapy on screening mammographic sensitivity and cancer stage at diagnosis: review of 183,134 screening mammograms in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Radiology. 1998; 209: 511-518.
18. Gill KS, Yankaskas BC,. Screening mammography performance and cancer detection among black women and white women in community practice. Cancer. 2004; 100: 139-148.
19. Keen JD, Keen JE,. How does age affect baseline screening mammography performance measures? A decision model [serial online]. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2008; 8: 40.
20. Kerlikowske K, Phillips KA, Cummings SR, Salzmann P, Cauley JA,. Screening mammography in elderly women. JAMA. 2000; 283: 3202-3204.
21. 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: 543-549.
22. US Food and Drug Administration. Mammography Quality and Standards Act National Statistics, 2014. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/MammographyQualityStandardsActandProgram/FacilityScorecard/ucm113858.htm. Accessed August 22, 2014.
23. Bonnier P, Romain S, Charpin C, et al. Age as a prognostic factor in breast cancer: relationship to pathologic and biologic features. Int J Cancer. 1995; 62: 138-144.
24. Cheung KL, Wong AW, Parker H, et al. Pathological features of primary breast cancer in the elderly based on needle core biopsies-a large series from a single centre. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2008; 67: 263-267.
25. Daidone MG, Coradini D, Martelli G, Veneroni S,. Primary breast cancer in elderly women: biological profile and relation with clinical outcome. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2003; 45: 313-325.
26. Diab SG, Elledge RM, Clark GM,. Tumor characteristics and clinical outcome of elderly women with breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000; 92: 550-556.
27. Durbecq V, Ameye L, Veys I, et al. A significant proportion of elderly patients develop hormone-dependent "luminal-B" tumours associated with aggressive characteristics. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2008; 67: 80-92.
28. Singh R, Hellman S, Heimann R,. The natural history of breast carcinoma in the elderly: implications for screening and treatment. Cancer. 2004; 100: 1807-1813.
29. Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001; 98: 10869-10874.
30. Braithwaite D, Zhu W, Hubbard RA, et al. Screening outcomes in older US women undergoing multiple mammograms in community practice: does interval, age, or comorbidity score affect tumor characteristics or false positive rates? J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013; 105: 334-341.
31. Walter LC, Covinsky KE,. Cancer screening in elderly patients: a framework for individualized decision making. JAMA. 2001; 285: 2750-2756.
32. Mandelblatt JS, Silliman R,. Hanging in the balance: making decisions about the benefits and harms of breast cancer screening among the oldest old without a safety net of scientific evidence. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27: 487-490.
33. Esserman LJ, Thompson IM Jr, Reid B,. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment in cancer: an opportunity for improvement. JAMA. 2013; 310: 797-798.
34. Braithwaite D, Mandelblatt JS, Kerlikowske K,. To screen or not to screen older women for breast cancer: a conundrum. Future Oncol. 2013; 9: 763-766.