Benefits and Harms of Mammography Screening after Age 74 Years: Model Estimates of Overdiagnosis

Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Volumn 107, Issue 7, 2015, Pages

  Van Ravesteyn, Nicolien T ^a   Stout, Natasha K ^b   Schechter, Clyde B ^c   Heijnsdijk, Eveline A M ^a   Alagoz, Oguzhan ^d   Trentham Dietz, Amy ^e   Mandelblatt, Jeanne S ^f   De Koning, Harry J ^a  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^c ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering ^*  (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN   (United States)

^f GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; AGING; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER OVERDIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; GERIATRIC PATIENT; HARM BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; INVASIVE BREAST CANCER; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; VERY ELDERLY; WOMEN'S HEALTH; ADVERSE EFFECTS; AGE DISTRIBUTION; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CANCER REGISTRY; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; EARLY CANCER DIAGNOSIS; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; MASS SCREENING; MORTALITY; PROCEDURES; RADIOGRAPHY; STATISTICAL MODEL; UNITED STATES;

AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; AGING; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, STATISTICAL; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; SEER PROGRAM; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84939479118     PISSN: 00278874     EISSN: 14602105     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djv103     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Nystrom L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, et al. Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet. 2002;359(9310):909-919.
2. Tabar L, Vitak B, Chen HH, et al. The Swedish Two-County Trial twenty years later. Updated mortality results and new insights from long-term follow-up. Radiol Clin North Am. 2000;38(4):625-651.
3. Otto SJ, Fracheboud J, Looman CW, et al. Initiation of population-based mammography screening in Dutch municipalities and effect on breast-cancer mortality: A systematic review. Lancet. 2003;361(9367):1411-1417.
4. Independent U. K. Panel on Breast Cancer Screening. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: An independent review. Lancet. 2012;380(9855):1778-1786.
5. Ferlay J, Shin H, Bray F, et al. GLOBOCAN 2008 v1.2, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 10. http://globocan.iarc.fr.
6. SEER Stat Database: Incidence - SEER 18 Regs Research Data + Hurricane Katrina Impacted Louisiana Cases. Linked To County Attributes - Total U.S., 1969-2010 Counties, National Cancer Institute, DCCPS, Surveillance Research Program, Surveillance Systems Branch, released April 2012. Based on the November 2011 submission.
7. Sinclair N, Littenberg B, Geller B, et al. Accuracy of screening mammography in older women. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197(5):1268-1273.
8. Biesheuvel C, Barratt A, Howard K, et al. Effects of study methods and biases on estimates of invasive breast cancer overdetection with mammography screening: A systematic review. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8(12):1129-1138.
9. de Gelder R, Heijnsdijk EA, van Ravesteyn NT, et al. Interpreting overdiagnosis estimates in population-based mammography screening. Epidemiol Rev. 2011;33(1):111-121.
10. Jorgensen KJ, Gotzsche PC. Overdiagnosis in publicly organised mammography screening programmes: systematic review of incidence trends. BMJ. 2009;339:b2587.
11. Jorgensen KJ, Keen JD, Gotzsche PC. Is mammographic screening justifiable considering its substantial overdiagnosis rate and minor effect on mortality? Radiology. 2011;260(3):621-627.
12. Kalager M, Adami HO, Bretthauer M, et al. Overdiagnosis of invasive breast cancer because of mammography screening: results from the norwegian screening program. Ann Intern Med. 2012;156(7):491-499.
13. Kopans DB, Smith RA, Duffy SW. Mammographic screening and "overdiagnosis". Radiology. 2011;260(3):616-620.
14. Duffy SW, Tabar L, Olsen AH, et al. Absolute numbers of lives saved and overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening, from a randomized trial and from the Breast Screening Programme in England. J Med Screen. 2010;17(1):25-30.
15. Bleyer A, Welch HG. Effect of three decades of screening mammography on breast-cancer incidence. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(21):1998-2005.
16. Etzioni R, Gulati R, Mallinger L, et al. Influence of study features and methods on overdiagnosis estimates in breast and prostate cancer screening. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158(11):831-838.
17. Bellizzi KM, Breslau ES, Burness A, et al. Prevalence of cancer screening in older, racially diverse adults: still screening after all these years. Arch Intern Med. 2011;171(22):2031-2037.
18. Fox SA, Murata PJ, Stein JA. The impact of physician compliance on screening mammography for older women. Arch Intern Med. 1991;151(1):50-56.
19. Meissner HI, Breen N, Taubman ML, et al. Which women aren't getting mammograms and why? (United States). Cancer Causes Control. 2007;18(1):61-70.
20. Leach CR, Klabunde CN, Alfano CM, et al. Physician over-recommendation of mammography for terminally ill women. Cancer. 2012;118(1):27-37.
21. Smith RA, Cokkinides V, Brawley OW. Cancer screening in the United States, 2012: A review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012;62:129-142.
22. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(10):716-726, W-236.
23. Mandelblatt JS, Cronin KA, Bailey S, et al. Effects of mammography screening under different screening schedules: model estimates of potential benefits and harms Ann Int Med. 2009;151:738-747.
24. Barratt A, Howard K, Irwig L, et al. Model of outcomes of screening mammography: information to support informed choices. BMJ. 2005;330(7497):936.
25. Duffy SW, Sasieni P, Olsen AH, et al. Modelling the likely effect of the increase of the upper age limit from 70 to 73 for breast screening in the UK National Programme. Stat Methods Med Res. 2010;19(5):547-555.
26. Mandelblatt JS, Schechter CB, Yabroff KR, et al. Toward optimal screening strategies for older women. Costs, benefits, and harms of breast cancer screening by age, biology, and health status. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20(6):487- 496.
27. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Sox HC, et al. US women's attitudes to false-positive mammography results and detection of ductal carcinoma in situ: cross sectional survey. BMJ. 2000;320(7250):1635-1640.
28. Wegwarth O, Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, et al. Do physicians understand cancer screening statistics? A national survey of primary care physicians in the United States. Ann Intern Med. 2012;156(5):340-349.
29. Harris R, Sawaya GF, Moyer VA, et al. Reconsidering the criteria for evaluating proposed screening programs: reflections from 4 current and former members of the U.S. Preventive services task force. Epidemiol Rev. 2011;33(1):20-35.
30. Fryback DG, Stout NK, Rosenberg MA, et al. The Wisconsin Breast Cancer Epidemiology Simulation Model. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006(36):37-47.
31. Mandelblatt J, Schechter CB, Lawrence W, et al. The SPECTRUM population model of the impact of screening and treatment on U.S. breast cancer trends from 1975 to 2000: principles and practice of the model methods. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006(36):47-55.
32. Tan SY, van Oortmarssen GJ, de Koning HJ, et al. The MISCAN-Fadia continuous tumor growth model for breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006(36):56-65.
33. Berry DA, Cronin KA, Plevritis SK, et al. Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(17):1784-1792.
34. Holford TR, Cronin KA, Mariotto AB, et al. Changing patterns in breast cancer incidence trends. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006(36):19-25.
35. Cronin KA, Mariotto AB, Clarke LD, et al. Additional common inputs for analyzing impact of adjuvant therapy and mammography on U.S. mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006(36):26-29.
36. Rosenberg MA. Competing risks to breast cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006(36):15-19.
37. de Haes JC, de Koning HJ, van Oortmarssen GJ, et al. The impact of a breast cancer screening programme on quality-adjusted life-years. Int J Cancer. 1991;49(4):538-544.
38. Stout NK, Rosenberg MA, Trentham-Dietz A, et al. Retrospective costeffectiveness analysis of screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98(11):774-782.
39. Mandelblatt JS, Schechter CB, Yabroff KR, et al. Benefits and costs of interventions to improve breast cancer outcomes in African American women. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(13):2554-2566.
40. Wong IO, Kuntz KM, Cowling BJ, et al. Cost effectiveness of mammography screening for Chinese women. Cancer. 2007;110(4):885-895.
41. Walter LC, Schonberg MA. Screening mammography in older women: A review. JAMA. 2014;311(13):1336-1347.
42. Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Gulati R, Mariotto AB, et al. Personalizing age of cancer screening cessation based on comorbid conditions: model estimates of harms and benefits. Ann Intern Med. 2014;161(2):104-112.
43. Whitehead SJ, Ali S. Health outcomes in economic evaluation: The QALY and utilities. Br Med Bull. 2010;96:5-21.
44. McGregor M. Cost-utility analysis: use QALYs only with great caution. CMAJ. 2003;168(4):433-434.
45. Boer R, de Koning HJ, van Oortmarssen GJ, et al. In search of the best upper age limit for breast cancer screening. Eur J Cancer. 1995;31A(12):2040-2043.
46. Puliti D, Duffy SW, Miccinesi G, et al. Overdiagnosis in mammographic screening for breast cancer in Europe: A literature review. J Med Screen. 2012;19(Suppl 1):42-56.
47. Morrow M. The certainties and the uncertainties of ductal carcinoma in situ. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96(6):424-425.
48. Eusebi V, Feudale E, Foschini MP, et al. Long-term follow-up of in situ carcinoma of the breast. Semin Diagn Pathol. 1994;11(3):223-235.
49. Feig SA. Ductal carcinoma in situ. Implications for screening mammography. Radiol Clin North Am. 2000;38(4):653-668, vii.
50. Betsill WL Jr, Rosen PP, Lieberman PH, et al. Intraductal carcinoma. Longterm follow-up after treatment by biopsy alone. JAMA. 1978;239(18):1863- 1867.
51. Welch HG, Black WC. Using autopsy series to estimate the disease "reservoir" for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: how much more breast cancer can we find? Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(11):1023-1028.
52. de Gelder R, Fracheboud J, Heijnsdijk EA, et al. Digital mammography screening: weighing reduced mortality against increased overdiagnosis. Prev Med. 2011;53(3):134-140.
53. Baxter NN, Virnig BA, Durham SB, et al. Trends in the treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96(6):443-448.
54. Habel LA, Achacoso NS, Haque R, et al. Declining recurrence among ductal carcinoma in situ patients treated with breast-conserving surgery in the community setting. Breast Cancer Res. 2009;11(6):R85.
55. Livaudais JC, Hwang ES, Karliner L, et al. Adjuvant hormonal therapy use among women with ductal carcinoma in situ. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2012;21(1):35-42.
56. Schonberg MA, Marcantonio ER, Li D, et al. Breast cancer among the oldest old: Tumor characteristics, treatment choices, and survival. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(12):2038-2045.
57. Crivellari D, Bonetti M, Castiglione-Gertsch M, et al. Burdens and benefits of adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil and tamoxifen for elderly patients with breast cancer: The International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial VII. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(7):1412-1422.
58. Partridge AH, Elmore JG, Saslow D, et al. Challenges in ductal carcinoma in situ risk communication and decision-making: report from an American Cancer Society and National Cancer Institute workshop. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012;62(3):203-210.
59. Marshall E. Breast cancer. Dare to do less. Science. 2014;343(6178):1454- 1456.