The Dana-Farber CISNET Model for Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: An Update

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 38, Issue 1_suppl, 2018, Pages 44S-53S

  Lee, Sandra J ^a   Li, Xiaoxue ^a   Huang, Hui ^a   Zelen, Marvin ^b  

^a DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

ductal carcinoma in situ; lead time; mammography screening; overdiagnosis

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; BREAST DENSITY; BREAST TUMOR; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; EARLY CANCER DIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICE; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASSACHUSETTS; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; VERY ELDERLY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BREAST DENSITY; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASSACHUSETTS; MEDICAL OVERUSE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, STATISTICAL; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 85040572205     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: 1552681X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X17741634     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Lee SJ, Zelen M., Scheduling periodic examinations for the early detection of disease: applications to breast cancer. J Am Stat Assoc. 1998;93:1271–81.
2. Lee SJ, Zelen M., A stochastic model for predicting the moartlity of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006;36:79–86.
3. Lee SJ, Zelen M., Mortality modeling of early detection program. Biometrics. 2008;64:386–95.
4. van Ravesteyn NT, Miglioretti DL, Stout NK. Tipping the balance of benefits and harms to favor screening mammography starting at age 40 years: a comparative modeling study of risk. Ann Intern Med. 2012;156:609–17.
5. Stout NK, Lee SJ, Schechter CB. Benefits, harms, and costs for breast cancer screening after US implementation of digital mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106(6):dju092.
6. Munoz D, Near AM, van Ravesteyn NT. Effects of screening and systemic adjuvant therapy on ER-specific US breast cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106(11).
7. Mandelblatt JS, Stout NK, Schechter CB. Collaborative modeling of the benefits and harms associated with different U.S. breast cancer screening strategies. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164:215–25.
8. van Ravesteyn N, van den Broek J, Li X. Modeling ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): An overview of CISNET model approaches. Med Decis Making. 2018;38(1S):126–139.
9. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts and Figures2015. Atlanta: American Cancer Society, Inc.; 2015.
10. Esserman L, Yau C., Rethinking the standard for ductal carcinoma in situ treatment. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1:881–3.
11. Mandelblatt J, Near A, Miglioretti DL. Common model inputs used in CISNET collaborative breast cancer modeling. Med Decis Making. 2018;38(1S):9–23.
12. Luke C, Priest K, Roder D., Changes in incidence of in situ and invasive breast cancer by histology type following mammography screening. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2006;7:69–74.
13. Nagi CS, O’Donnell JE, Tismenetsky M, Bleiweiss IJ, Jaffer SM., Lobular neoplasia on core needle biopsy does not require excision. Cancer. 2008;112:2152–8.
14. Eheman CR, Shaw KM, Ryerson AB, Miller JW, Ajani UA, White MC., The changing incidence of in situ and invasive ductal and lobular breast carcinomas: United States, 1999-2004. Cancer Epidemiol Biomerkers Prev. 2009;18:1763–9.
15. Ward EM, DeSantis CE, Lin CC. Cancer statistics: Breast cancer in situ. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65:481–95.
16. Lee SJ, Zelen M., Modeling the early detection of breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2003;14:1199–202.
17. Zelen M, Feinleib M., On the theory of screening for chronic diseases. Biometrika. 1969;56:601–14.
18. Shen Y, Zelen M., Screening sensitivity and sojourn time from breast cancer early detection trials: mammograms and physical examinations. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:3496–9.
19. Berkson J, Gage RP., Survival curve for cancer patients following treatment. J Am Stat Assoc. 1952;47:501–15.
20. Holford TR, Cronin KA, Mariotto AB, Feuer EJ., Changing patterns in breast cancer incidence trends. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006;36:19–25.
21. Gangnon RE, Sprague BL, Stout NK. The contribution of mammography screening to breast cancer incidence trends in the United States; an updated age-period-cohort model. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2015;24:905–12.
22. Hofvind Geller B, Vacek PM, Thoresen S, Skaane P., Using the European guidelines to evaluate the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program. Eur J Epidemiol. 2007;22:447–55.
23. Vacek PM, Geller BM., A prospective study of breast cancer risk using routine mammographic breast density measurements. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2004;13:715–22.
24. Cronin KA, Mariotto AB, Clarke LD, Feuer E., Additional common input for analyzing impact of adjuvant therapy and mammography on U.S mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006;36:26–9.