Benefits and harms of annual, biennial, or triennial breast cancer mammography screening for women at average risk of breast cancer: a systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC)

Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: finding the balance between overtreatment and undertreatment

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) accounts for 15-25% of all breast cancer diagnoses. Its prognosis is excellent overall, the main risk being the occurrence of local breast events, as most cases of DCIS do not progress to invasive cancer. Systematic screening has greatly increased the incidence of this non-obligate precursor of invasion, lending urgency to the need to identify DCIS that is prone to invasive progression and distinguish it from non-invasion-prone DCIS, as the latter can be overdiagnosed and therefore overtreated. Treatment strategies, including surgery, radiotherapy, and optional endocrine therapy, decrease the risk of local events, but have no effect on survival outcomes. Active surveillance is being evaluated as a possible new option for low-risk DCIS. Considerable efforts to decipher the biology of DCIS have led to a better understanding of the factors that determine its variable natural history. Given this variability, shared decision making regarding optimal, personalised treatment strategies is the most appropriate course of action. Well designed, risk-based de-escalation studies remain a major need in this field.

Genetic landscape of interval and screen detected breast cancer

Interval breast cancers (IBCs) are cancers diagnosed between screening episodes. Understanding the biological differences between IBCs and screen-detected breast-cancers (SDBCs) has the potential to improve mammographic screening and patient management. We analysed and compared the genomic landscape of 288 IBCs and 473 SDBCs by whole genome sequencing of paired tumour-normal patient samples collected as part of the UK 100,000 Genomes Project. Compared to SDBCs, IBCs were more likely to be lobular, higher grade, and triple negative. A more aggressive clinical phenotype was reflected in IBCs displaying features of genomic instability including a higher mutation rate and number of chromosomal structural abnormalities, defective homologous recombination and TP53 mutations. We did not however, find evidence to indicate that IBCs are associated with a significantly different immune response. While IBCs do not represent a unique molecular class of invasive breast cancer they exhibit a more aggressive phenotype, which is likely to be a consequence of the timing of tumour initiation. This information is relevant both with respect to treatment as well as informing the screening interval for mammography.

Impact of different age ranges on the benefits and harms of the breast cancer screening programme by the EU-TOPIA tool

BACKGROUND

The recommendation for the implementation of mammography screening in women aged 45-49 and 70-74 is conditional with moderate certainty of the evidence. The aim of this study is to simulate the long-term outcomes (2020-50) of using different age range scenarios in the breast cancer screening programme of the Valencia Region (Spain), considering different programme participation rates.

METHODS

Three age range scenarios (S) were simulated with the EU-TOPIA tool, considering a biennial screening interval: S1, 45-69 years old (y); S2, 50-69 y and S3, 45-74 y. Simulations were performed for four participation rates: A = current participation (72.7%), B = +5%, C = +10% and D = +20%. Considered benefits: number (N°) of in situ and invasive breast cancers (BC) (screen vs. clinically detected), N° of BC deaths and % BC mortality reduction. Considered harms: N° of false positives (FP) and % overdiagnosis.

RESULTS

The results showed that BC mortality decreased in all scenarios, being higher in S3A (32.2%) than S1A (30.6%) and S2A (27.9%). Harms decreased in S2A vs. S1A (N° FP: 236 vs. 423, overdiagnosis: 4.9% vs. 5.0%) but also benefits (BC mortality reduction: 27.9% vs. 30.6%, N° screen-detected invasive BC 15/28 vs. 18/25). In S3A vs. S1A, an increase in benefits was observed (BC mortality reduction: 32.2% vs. 30.6%), N° screen-detected in situ B: 5/2 vs. 4/3), but also in harms (N° FP: 460 vs. 423, overdiagnosis: 5.8% vs. 5.0%). Similar trends were observed with increased participation.

CONCLUSIONS

As the age range increases, so does not only the reduction in BC mortality, but also the probability of FP and overdiagnosis.

Factors associated with adherence to medications for lowering breast cancer risk between female Medicare beneficiaries in Alabama and nationwide

PURPOSE

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends use of selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) and aromatase inhibitors (AIs) for breast cancer (BC) prevention. We examined factors associated with adherence to SERMs/AI treatments among female Medicare beneficiaries in Alabama and those nationwide.

METHODS

This retrospective new user cohort study analyzed the 2013-2016 Medicare administrative claims data files (100% Alabama and random 5% national samples). Female Medicare beneficiaries without invasive BC and osteoporosis, continuously enrolled in Medicare Parts A, B, and D for at least 18 months (with a 6-month washout and a 12-month follow-up period) in 2013-2016. Among beneficiaries who initiated (6-month washout) any of the SERMs/AIs (tamoxifen, raloxifene, anastrozole, and exemestane), we examined their 1-year treatment adherence using proportion of days covered (PDC) and operationalized as both continuous (0-1) and dichotomized (≥ 80% as adherent and < 80% as non-adherent) outcomes. Multivariable logistic models were used to identify factors associated with adherence (PDC ≥ 80%) among Alabama and national samples, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 885 women in Alabama and 1,213 women in national sample initiated these SERMs/AI treatments. Among those with ≥ 2 prescriptions (n = 479 in Alabama and n = 870 in national sample), Mean PDC was 0.74 [standard deviation (SD) = 0.30] among Alabamian women, similar to those in the national sample [0.71 (SD = 0.31), p = 0.09]. Use of mammography prior to treatment initiation was associated with higher likelihood of adherence to treatments in both samples.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight the importance of access to preventive services such as mammography to better adherence to BC preventive treatments among female Medicare beneficiaries.

Rural racial disparities and barriers in mammography utilization among Medicare beneficiaries in Texas: A longitudinal study

This study examined rural racial/ethnic disparities in long-term mammography screening practices among Medicare beneficiaries. A retrospective longitudinal study was conducted using 100% Texas Medicare data for women aged 65-74 who enrolled in Medicare between 2010-2013. Of the 114,939 eligible women, 21.2% of Hispanics, 33.3% of non-Hispanic Blacks (NHB), and 38.4% non-Hispanic Whites (NHW) in rural areas were regular users of mammography, compared to 33.5%, 44.9%, and 45.3% of their counterparts in urban areas, respectively. Stratification analyses showed rural Hispanics and NHB were 33% (95% CI, 25% - 40%) and 22% (95% CI, 6% - 36%) less likely to be regular users of mammography compared to their urban counterparts. Major barriers to routine mammography screening included the lack of a primary care provider, frequent hospitalization, and comorbidity. The findings of this study highlight the importance of addressing rural racial disparities in mammography utilization among older women to ensure equitable screening practices for all populations.

Patient counseling for breast cancer screening: Taking changes to USPSTF recommendations into account

The US Preventive Services Task Force now recommends mammography screening every other year starting at age 40 to decrease the risk of dying from breast cancer, but questions remain regarding biennial versus annual screening as well as disparities in risk factors and outcomes among Black people.

Integrating clinical research in an operative screening and diagnostic breast imaging department: First experience, results and perspectives using microwave imaging

Rationale and objectives

Clinical research is crucial for evaluating new medical procedures and devices. It is important for healthcare units and hospitals to minimize the disruptions caused by conducting clinical studies; however, complex clinical pathways require dedicated recruitment and study designs.This work presents the effective introduction of novel microwave breast imaging (MBI), via MammoWave apparatus, into the clinical routine of an operative screening and diagnostic breast imaging department for conducting a multicentric clinical study.

Materials and methods

Microwave breast imaging, using MammoWave apparatus, was performed on volunteers coming from different clinical pathways. Clinical data, comprising demographics and conventional radiologic reports (used as reference standard), was collected; a satisfaction questionnaire was filled by every volunteer. Microwave images were analyzed by an automatic clinical decision support system, which quantified their corresponding features to discriminate between breasts with no relevant radiological findings (NF) and breasts with described findings (WF).

Results

Conventional breast imaging (DBT, US, MRI) and MBI were performed and adapted to assure best clinical practices and optimum pathways. 180 volunteers, both symptomatic and asymptomatic, were enrolled in the study. After microwave images' quality assessment, 48 NF (15 dense) and 169 WF (88 dense) breasts were used for the prospective study; 48 (18 dense) breasts suffered from a histology-confirmed carcinoma. An overall sensitivity of 85.8 % in breasts lesions' detection was achieved by the microwave imaging apparatus.

Conclusion

An optimum recruitment strategy was implemented to assess MBI. Future trials may show the clinical usefulness of microwave imaging, which may play an important role in breast screening.

The cost-effectiveness of risk-stratified breast cancer screening in the UK

BACKGROUND

There has been growing interest in the UK and internationally of risk-stratified breast screening whereby individualised risk assessment may inform screening frequency, starting age, screening instrument used, or even decisions not to screen. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of eight proposals for risk-stratified screening regimens compared to both the current UK screening programme and no national screening.

METHODS

A person-level microsimulation model was developed to estimate health-related quality of life, cancer survival and NHS costs over the lifetime of the female population eligible for screening in the UK.

RESULTS

Compared with both the current screening programme and no screening, risk-stratified regimens generated additional costs and QALYs, and had a larger net health benefit. The likelihood of the current screening programme being the optimal scenario was less than 1%. No screening amongst the lowest risk group, and triannual, biennial and annual screening amongst the three higher risk groups was the optimal screening strategy from those evaluated.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that risk-stratified breast cancer screening has the potential to be beneficial for women at the population level, but the net health benefit will depend on the particular risk-based strategy.

Provision of screening services for cervical and breast cancer - A scientific study commissioned by the European Board & College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (EBCOG)

OBJECTIVE

Cancer screening can play an important role in early detection, improving treatment outcomes and reducing morbidity and mortality. Breast and cervical cancers belong to the most common gynaecological cancers group. Countries provide different screening programmes on its eligible population basis centred on different health care policies. This scientific study aims to assess and understand the health inequalities in the member countries of the European Board & College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (EBCOG) as regards screening programmes of gynaecological cancer, with a special focus on breast and cervical cancers' screening strategies.

STUDY DESIGN

A descriptive questionnaire-based study was conducted, addressed to EBCOG member countries.

RESULTS

Ninety-one percent of the countries have an organized national or regional screening programme for cervical cancer. Of these, 45% of countries use both cytology and testing for Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) as screening test, 31% use cytology exclusively and 17% only perform HPV testing. Considerable differences were found regarding the interval of screening test: there are countries performing HPV detection triennially, while others perform only conventional cytology every 5 years. Sixty-nine percent of countries included in this study begin screening for cervical cancer in women aged 25 to 29 years, four of them using HPV detection as the screening test. Six countries begin cervical cancer screening before the age of 25. As regards vaccination against HPV, almost all countries have implemented national HPV vaccination programme, except in Poland and Turkey. The 9-valent HPV vaccine is the most frequently offered (77% of countries) and the majority vaccination programmes include both girls and boys. As regards breast cancer screening, all thirty-two countries have an implemented screening programme. All countries perform mammography as the screening test, 62.5% of them begin in women aged 50 to 54, with a 2-yearly interval in the majority. In five countries, screening programmes are performed biennially, starting between 45 and 49 years old. Seven countries start in women aged 41 to 44.

CONCLUSIONS

There are discrepancies around gynaecological cancer screenings provision among EBCOG member countries. It is important to establish European recommendations about screening for gynaecological cancers, in order to standardize the access to equitable better health care in gynaecological cancers within Europe.

Prolonged screening interval due to the COVID-19 pandemic and its association with tumor characteristics and treatment; a register-based study from BreastScreen Norway

OBJECTIVE

During the COVID-19 pandemic Norway had to suspend its national breast cancer screening program. We aimed to investigate the effect of the pandemic-induced suspension on the screening interval, and its subsequent association with the tumor characteristics and treatment of screen-detected (SDC) and interval breast cancer (IC).

METHODS

Information about women aged 50-69, participating in BreastScreen Norway, and diagnosed with a SDC (N = 3799) or IC (N = 1806) between 2018 and 2021 was extracted from the Cancer Registry of Norway. Logistic regression was used to investigate the association between COVID-19 induced prolonged screening intervals and tumor characteristics and treatment.

RESULTS

Women with a SDC and their last screening exam before the pandemic had a median screening interval of 24.0 months (interquartile range: 23.8-24.5), compared to 27.0 months (interquartile range: 25.8-28.5) for those with their last screening during the pandemic. The tumor characteristics and treatment of women with a SDC, last screening during the pandemic, and a screening interval of 29-31 months, did not differ from those of women with a SDC, last screening before the pandemic, and a screening interval of 23-25 months. ICs detected 24-31 months after screening, were more likely to be histological grade 3 compared to ICs detected 0-23 months after screening (odds ratio: 1.40, 95% confidence interval: 1.06-1.84).

CONCLUSIONS

Pandemic-induced prolonged screening intervals were not associated with the tumor characteristics and treatment of SDCs, but did increase the risk of a histopathological grade 3 IC. This study provides insights into the possible effects of extending the screening interval.

Evaluation of a population-based breast cancer screening in North China

BACKGROUND

Despite mammography-based screening for breast cancer has been conducted in many countries, there are still little data on participation and diagnostic yield in population-based breast cancer screening in China.

METHODS

We enrolled 151,973 eligible women from four cities in Hebei Province within the period 2013-2021 and followed up until December 31, 2021. Participants aged 40-74 who assessed as high risk were invited to undergo breast ultrasound and mammography examination. Overall and group-specific participation rates were calculated. Multivariable analyses were used to estimate the factors associated with participation rates. The diagnostic yield of both screening and no screening groups was calculated. We further analyzed the stage distribution and molecular subtype of breast cancer cases by different modes of cancer detection.

RESULTS

A total of 42,547 participants were evaluated to be high risk of breast cancer. Among them, 23,009 subjects undertook screening services, with participation rate of 54.08%. Multivariable logistic regression model showed that aged 45-64, high education level, postmenopausal, current smoking, alcohol consumption, family history of breast cancer, and benign breast disease were associated with increased participation of screening. After median follow-up of 3.79 years, there were 456 breast cancer diagnoses of which 65 were screen-detected breast cancers (SBCs), 27 were interval breast cancers (IBCs), 68 were no screening cancers, and 296 were cancers detected outside the screening program. Among them, 92 participants in the screening group (0.40%) and 364 in the non-screening group (0.28%) had breast cancer detected, which resulted in an odds ratio of 1.42 (95% CI 1.13-1.78; P = 0.003). We observed a higher detection rate of breast cancer in the screening group, with ORs of 2.42 (95% CI 1.72-3.41) for early stage (stages 0-I) and 2.12 (95% CI 1.26-3.54) for luminal A subtype. SBCs had higher proportion of early stage (71.93%) and luminal A subtype (47.22%) than other groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The significant differences in breast cancer diagnosis between the screening and non-screening group imply an urgent need for increased breast cancer awareness and early detection in China.

Experience of Pain and Unpleasantness during Mammography Screening: A Cross-Sectional Study on the Roles of Emotional, Cognitive, and Personality Factors

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is the most frequent cause of malignant tumors among women worldwide. Its successful prevention depends on the degree of participation in screening programs, which can be influenced by psychological factors, including fear.

METHOD

A cross-sectional study was conducted according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement. Twenty-six healthy women aged 50-69 years took part in this study, all of whom were summoned for routine mammography screening and were randomly selected. Prior mammography screening, breast pain intensity, unpleasantness (visual analog scale), and psychological (catastrophizing, state anxiety, and fear of pain) and personality (neuroticism, psychoticism, and extraversion) variables were evaluated. Pain, unpleasantness, and state anxiety were further evaluated pre- and post-mammography screening.

RESULTS

During the mammography screening, pain and unpleasantness levels were higher than those observed pre- and post-screening. Residual unpleasantness remained post-screening. State anxiety was positively associated with pain, and psychoticism with unpleasantness, as reported by participants during the mammography screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Anxiety levels influence the pain experienced in association with the mammography procedure. Women subjected to mammography screenings might benefit from relaxation strategies aimed at reducing anxiety to pre-mammography levels and, by extension, pain and unpleasantness during mammography. The inclusion of these strategies in breast cancer prevention campaigns could improve the rates of mammography reattendance, and therefore, benefit cancer prevention efforts.

Intermammary breast cancer: A rare case of cancer with origin of breast cells in an unusual location

The most common type of cancer among the female population is breast cancer. The most common site for the occurrence of breast cancer is the upper outer quadrant; the upper inner quadrant is the second site, and both the lower outer and the lower inner quadrants are in the third place. This problem is rarely seen in the central portion. Intermammary metastasis due to breast cancer is an infrequent finding. This article presents a 62-year-old lady who presented to the surgical ward with intermammary swelling that appeared suddenly 3 months ago. Ultrasound examination showed a hypoechoic micro-lobulated mass with internal vascularity on the chest wall. Although core needle biopsy suspected invasive ductal carcinoma, both right and left axillary lymph nodes were normal and free. The patient was consulted by an oncologist who recommended radiotherapy before surgery and chemotherapy before and after surgery. This study aims to report and discuss a rare case of intermammary cancer with the origin of breast cells without breast and axillary lymph node involvement. Although the intermammary region is an extremely rare location where breast cancer could occur, its management strategy is the same as other breast cancers.

The Association Between Mammography Screening Frequency and Breast Cancer Treatment and Outcomes: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

Guidelines for optimal frequency of screening mammography vary by professional society. Sparse evidence exists on the association between screening frequency and breast cancer treatment options. The main objective was to examine differences in cancer treatment rendered for U.S. women with different numbers of screenings prior to breast cancer diagnosis. Cancer stage at diagnosis and health care cost were assessed in secondary analyses.

METHODS

This IRB-exempt retrospective study used administrative claims data to identify women aged 44 or older with various numbers of mammographic screenings ≥11 months apart, during the four years prior to incident breast cancer diagnosis from January 2010 to December 2018. Outcomes were assessed over the six months following diagnosis. Generalized linear regression models were used to compare women with differing numbers of mammograms, adjusting for patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Claims data review identified 25 492 women who met inclusion criteria. There was a stepwise improvement in each of these screening categories such that women with four screenings, compared to women with only one screening, experienced higher rates of lumpectomy (70% vs 55%) and radiation therapy (48% vs 36%), lower rates of mastectomy (27% vs 34%) and chemotherapy (28% vs 36%), less stage 3 or 4 cancer at diagnosis (15% vs 29%), and lower health care costs within six months postdiagnosis (P < 0.001). Results were similar in a subgroup limited to women aged 44 to 49 at diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Potential benefits of more frequent screening include less aggressive treatment and lower health care costs among women who develop breast cancer.

Australian women's judgements about using artificial intelligence to read mammograms in breast cancer screening

Objective

Mammographic screening for breast cancer is an early use case for artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare. This is an active area of research, mostly focused on the development and evaluation of individual algorithms. A growing normative literature argues that AI systems should reflect human values, but it is unclear what this requires in specific AI implementation scenarios. Our objective was to understand women's values regarding the use of AI to read mammograms in breast cancer screening.

Methods

We ran eight online discussion groups with a total of 50 women, focused on their expectations and normative judgements regarding the use of AI in breast screening.

Results

Although women were positive about the potential of breast screening AI, they argued strongly that humans must remain as central actors in breast screening systems and consistently expressed high expectations of the performance of breast screening AI. Women expected clear lines of responsibility for decision-making, to be able to contest decisions, and for AI to perform equally well for all programme participants. Women often imagined both that AI might replace radiographers and that AI implementation might allow more women to be screened: screening programmes will need to communicate carefully about these issues.

Conclusions

To meet women's expectations, screening programmes should delay implementation until there is strong evidence that the use of AI systems improves screening performance, should ensure that human expertise and responsibility remain central in screening programmes, and should avoid using AI in ways that exacerbate inequities.

Long-term effects of the interruption of the Dutch breast cancer screening program due to COVID-19: A modelling study

Due to COVID-19, the Dutch breast cancer screening program was interrupted for three months with uncertain long-term effects. The aim of this study was to estimate the long-term impact of this interruption on delay in detection, tumour size of screen-detected breast cancers, and interval cancer rate. After validation, the micro-simulation model SiMRiSc was used to calculate the effects of interruption of the breast cancer screening program for three months and for hypothetical interruptions of six and twelve months. A scenario without interruption was used as reference. Outcomes considered were tumour size of screen-detected breast cancers and interval cancer rate. Women of 55-59 and 60-64 years old at time of interruption were considered. Uncertainties were estimated using a sensitivity analysis. The three-month interruption had no clinically relevant long-term effect on the tumour size of screen-detected breast cancers. A 19% increase in interval cancer rate was found between last screening before and first screening after interruption compared to no interruption. Hypothetical interruptions of six and twelve months resulted in larger increases in interval cancer rate of 38% and 78% between last screening before and first screening after interruption, respectively, and an increase in middle-sized tumours in first screening after interruption of 26% and 47%, respectively. In conclusion, the interruption of the Dutch screening program is not expected to result in a long-term delay in detection or clinically relevant change in tumour size of screen-detected cancers, but only affects the interval cancer rate between last screening before and first screening after interruption.

Healthcare professionals' views following implementation of risk stratification into a national breast cancer screening programme

Background

It is crucial to determine feasibility of risk-stratified screening to facilitate successful implementation. We introduced risk-stratification (BC-Predict) into the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) at three screening sites in north-west England from 2019 to 2021. The present study investigated the views of healthcare professionals (HCPs) on acceptability, barriers, and facilitators of the BC-Predict intervention and on the wider implementation of risk-based screening after BC-Predict was implemented in their screening site.

Methods

Fourteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with HCPs working across the breast screening pathway at three NHSBSP sites that implemented BC-Predict. Thematic analysis interpreted the data.

Results

Three pre-decided themes were produced. (1) Acceptability of risk-based screening: risk-stratification was perceived as a beneficial step for both services and women. HCPs across the pathway reported low burden of running the BC-Predict trial on routine tasks, but with some residual concerns; (2) Barriers to implementation: comprised capacity constraints of services including the inadequacy of current IT systems to manage women with different risk profiles and, (3) Facilitators to implementation: included the continuation of stakeholder consultation across the pathway to inform implementation and need for dedicated risk screening admin staff, a push for mammography staff recruitment and guidance for screening services. Telephone helplines, integrating primary care, and supporting access for all language needs was emphasised.

Conclusion

Risk-stratified breast screening was viewed as a progressive step providing it does not worsen inequalities for women. Implementation of risk-stratified breast screening requires staff to be reassured that there will be systems in place to support implementation and that it will not further burden their workload. Next steps require a comprehensive assessment of the resource needed for risk-stratification versus current resource availability, upgrades to screening IT and building screening infrastructure. The role of primary care needs to be determined. Simplification and clarification of risk-based screening pathways is needed to support HCPs agency and facilitate implementation. Forthcoming evidence from ongoing randomised controlled trials assessing effectiveness of breast cancer risk-stratification will also determine implementation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-10134-0.

An update on the status of breast cancer screening in Brazil after the covid-19 pandemic

We have previously reported the impact of covid-19 pandemic on breast cancer screening, in Brazil: among women aged 50–69 years, mammography attendance decreased by 42% in public healthcare (SUS), comparing 2019 and 2020. In this short communication, we wish to present: a) an update of the number of mammograms performed, in 2021; b) an exploratory analysis of the characteristics of the screened population between 2019 and 2021. A total of 1.675.307 mammograms were performed in 2021, nearly 15% lower than pre-pandemic levels. Almost a third, 29.5% of them, had intervals greater than three years. In accordance with our previous study, the number of patients with palpable lumps on physical exam increased. The consequences of postponing breast cancer screening during the pandemic are still uncertain. Unfortunately, as of December 2021, screening attendance has not resumed. On the contrary, our results show an increase in the fraction of women with mammography delayed beyond three years.

Study protocol comparing the ethical, psychological and socio-economic impact of personalised breast cancer screening to that of standard screening in the "My Personal Breast Screening" (MyPeBS) randomised clinical trial

Background

The MyPeBS study is an ongoing randomised controlled trial testing whether a risk-stratified breast cancer screening strategy is non-inferior, or eventually superior, to standard age-based screening at reducing incidence of stage 2 or more cancers. This large European Commission-funded initiative aims to include 85,000 women aged 40 to 70 years, without prior breast cancer and not previously identified at high risk in six countries (Belgium, France, Italy, Israel, Spain, UK). A specific work package within MyPeBS examines psychological, socio-economic and ethical aspects of this new screening strategy. It compares women’s reported data and outcomes in both trial arms on the following issues: general anxiety, cancer-related worry, understanding of breast cancer screening strategy and information-seeking behaviour, socio-demographic and economic characteristics, quality of life, risk perception, intention to change health-related behaviours, satisfaction with the trial.

Methods

At inclusion, 3-months, 1-year and 4-years, each woman participating in MyPeBS is asked to fill online questionnaires. Descriptive statistics, bivariate analyses, subgroup comparisons and analysis of variations over time will be performed with appropriate tests to assess differences between arms. Multivariate regression models will allow modelling of different patient reported data and outcomes such as comprehension of the information provided, general anxiety or cancer worry, and information seeking behaviour. In addition, a qualitative study (48 semi-structured interviews conducted in France and in the UK with women randomised in the risk-stratified arm), will help further understand participants’ acceptability and comprehension of the trial, and their experience of risk assessment.

Discussion

Beyond the scientific and medical objectives of this clinical study, it is critical to acknowledge the consequences of such a paradigm shift for women. Indeed, introducing a risk-based screening relying on individual biological differences also implies addressing non-biological differences (e.g. social status or health literacy) from an ethical perspective, to ensure equal access to healthcare. The results of the present study will facilitate making recommendations on implementation at the end of the trial to accompany any potential change in screening strategy.

Trial registration

Study sponsor: UNICANCER. My personalised breast screening (MyPeBS). Clinicaltrials.gov (2018) available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03672331

Contact: Cécile VISSAC SABATIER, PhD, + 33 (0)1 73 79 77 58 ext + 330,142,114,293, contact@mypebs.eu.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09484-6.