1
|
Kopans DB. More than a Half Century of Misinformation About Breast Cancer Screening. Radiol Clin North Am 2024; 62:993-1002. [PMID: 39393857 DOI: 10.1016/j.rcl.2024.04.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/13/2024]
Abstract
The following is an overview of the numerous efforts to reduce access for women to breast cancer screening. Misinformation has been promoted over the many years to suggest that screening only works for women aged 50 years and over. In fact, there are no, scientifically derived data, to support the use of the age of 50 years as a threshold for screening. The randomized, controlled trials have proved that screening saves lives for women aged 40 to 74 years (the age of the women who participated).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel B Kopans
- Department of Radiology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wang S, Ji Y, Ren M, Li J, Yang Z. Estimating the Proportion of Overdiagnosis among Prostate, Breast, and Thyroid Cancers in China: Findings from the Global Burden of Disease 2019. Curr Oncol 2024; 31:5643-5651. [PMID: 39330046 PMCID: PMC11431510 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol31090418] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2024] [Revised: 09/15/2024] [Accepted: 09/19/2024] [Indexed: 09/28/2024] Open
Abstract
The incidence of prostate, breast, and thyroid cancers has increased in China over the past few decades. Whether and how much these increases can be attributed to overdiagnosis are less understood. This study aimed to estimate the proportion of overdiagnosis among these three cancers in China during 2004-2019. The age-specific cancer incidence, cancer mortality, and all-cause mortality in China were extracted from the Global Burden of Diseases 2019. The lifetime risk of developing and that of dying from each cancer were calculated using the life table method. The proportion of overdiagnosis of a cancer was estimated as the difference between the lifetime risk of developing the cancer and that of suffering from the cancer (including death, metastasis, and symptoms caused by the cancer), further divided by the lifetime risk of developing the cancer. The highest possible values of these parameters were adopted in the estimation so as to obtain the lower bounds of the proportions of overdiagnosis. Sensitivity analyses assuming different lag periods between the diagnosis of a cancer and death from the cancer were performed. The results showed that the lifetime risk of developing prostate, breast, and thyroid cancer increased dramatically from 2004 to 2019 in China, while the increase in the lifetime risk of dying from these cancers was less pronounced. The proportions of overdiagnosis among prostate, breast, and thyroid cancers were estimated to be 7.88%, 18.99%, and 24.92%, respectively, in 2004, and increased to 18.20%, 26.25%, and 29.24%, respectively, in 2019. The increasing trends were statistically significant for all three cancers (all p < 0.001). In sensitivity analyses, the proportions of overdiagnosis decreased, but upward trends over time remained for all three cancers. In conclusion, the overdiagnosis of prostate, breast, and thyroid cancers in China increased from 2004 to 2019, with the highest proportion seen in thyroid cancer and the most rapid increase seen in prostate cancer. Multifaceted efforts by policy makers, guideline developers, and clinicians are needed to tackle this problem.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shuting Wang
- JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - Yanlai Ji
- JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China
- Innovent Biologics, Shanghai 200050, China
| | - Mingxue Ren
- JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China
- Immunoprophylaxis Department, Anhui Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Hefei 230601, China
| | - Jun Li
- JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China
- Department of Biostatistics and Programming, Sanofi, Chengdu 610000, China
| | - Zuyao Yang
- JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Choe AI, Kaya Aumann E, Kasales C, Chetlen A, Sivarajah R. Tips for Addressing Screening Concerns: "Harms of Screening". JOURNAL OF BREAST IMAGING 2024; 6:457-464. [PMID: 38801726 DOI: 10.1093/jbi/wbae031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2023] [Indexed: 05/29/2024]
Abstract
Early detection decreases deaths from breast cancer. Yet, there are conflicting recommendations about screening mammography by major professional medical organizations, including the age and frequency with which women should be screened. The controversy over breast cancer screening is centered on 3 main points: the impact on mortality, overdiagnosis, and false positive results. Some studies claim that adverse psychological effects such as anxiety or distress are caused by screening mammography. The purpose of this article is to address negative breast cancer screening concerns including overdiagnosis and overtreatment, effect on mortality, false positive results, mammography-related anxiety, and fear of radiation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Angela I Choe
- Radiology, Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, USA
| | - Emel Kaya Aumann
- Radiology, Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, USA
| | - Claudia Kasales
- Radiology, Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, USA
| | - Alison Chetlen
- Radiology, Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, USA
| | - Rebecca Sivarajah
- Radiology, Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Destounis S, Arieno A. The New Proposed U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation on Breast Cancer Screening for Women in Their 40s. Ann Intern Med 2024; 177:1292. [PMID: 39284194 DOI: 10.7326/annals-24-00719] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/01/2024] Open
|
5
|
Narayan AK, Miles RC, Woods RW, Spalluto LB, Burnside ES. Methodological Considerations in Evaluating Breast Cancer Screening Studies. JOURNAL OF BREAST IMAGING 2024:wbae038. [PMID: 39096512 DOI: 10.1093/jbi/wbae038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2024] [Indexed: 08/05/2024]
Abstract
In evidence-based medicine frameworks, the highest level of evidence is derived from quantitative synthesis of double-masked, high-quality, randomly assigned controlled trials. Meta-analyses of randomly assigned controlled trials have demonstrated that screening mammography reduces breast cancer deaths. In the United States, every major guideline-producing organization has recommended screening mammography in average-risk women; however, there are controversies about age and frequency. Carefully controlled observational research studies and statistical modeling studies can address evidence gaps and inform evidence-based, contemporary screening practices. As breast imaging radiologists develop and evaluate existing and new screening tests and technologies, they will need to understand the key methodological considerations and scientific criteria used by policy makers and health service researchers to support dissemination and implementation of evidence-based screening tests. The Wilson and Jungner principles and the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force general analytic framework provide structured evaluations of the effectiveness of screening tests. Key considerations in both frameworks include public health significance, natural history of disease, cost-effectiveness, and characteristics of screening tests and treatments. Rigorous evaluation of screening tests using analytic frameworks can maximize the benefits of screening tests while reducing potential harms. The purpose of this article is to review key methodological considerations and analytic frameworks used to evaluate screening studies and develop evidence-based recommendations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anand K Narayan
- University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Randy C Miles
- Department of Radiology, Denver Health, Denver, CO, USA
| | - Ryan W Woods
- University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Lucy B Spalluto
- Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Elizabeth S Burnside
- University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Dal Maso L, Toffolutti F, De Paoli A, Giudici F, Francisci S, Bucchi L, Zorzi M, Fusco M, Caldarella A, Rossi S, De Angelis R, Botta L, Ravaioli A, Casella C, Musolino A, Vitale MF, Mangone L, Fanetti AC, Carpin E, Burgio Lo Monaco MG, Migliore E, Gambino ML, Ferrante M, Stracci F, Gasparotti C, Carrozzi G, Cavallo R, Mazzucco W, Ballotari P, Ferretti S, Sampietro G, Rizzello RV, Boschetti L, Cascone G, Mian M, Pesce MT, Piras D, Galasso R, Bella F, Seghini P, Pinna P, Crocetti E, Serraino D, Guzzinati S. Cure indicators and prevalence by stage at diagnosis for breast and colorectal cancer patients: A population-based study in Italy. Int J Cancer 2024; 155:270-281. [PMID: 38520231 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.34923] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2023] [Revised: 01/15/2024] [Accepted: 02/20/2024] [Indexed: 03/25/2024]
Abstract
People alive many years after breast (BC) or colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnoses are increasing. This paper aimed to estimate the indicators of cancer cure and complete prevalence for Italian patients with BC and CRC by stage and age. A total of 31 Italian Cancer Registries (47% of the population) data until 2017 were included. Mixture cure models allowed estimation of net survival (NS); cure fraction (CF); time to cure (TTC, 5-year conditional NS >95%); cure prevalence (who will not die of cancer); and already cured (prevalent patients living longer than TTC). 2.6% of all Italian women (806,410) were alive in 2018 after BC and 88% will not die of BC. For those diagnosed in 2010, CF was 73%, 99% when diagnosed at stage I, 81% at stage II, and 36% at stages III-IV. For all stages combined, TTC was >10 years under 45 and over 65 years and for women with advanced stages, but ≤1 year for all BC patients at stage I. The proportion of already cured prevalent BC women was 75% (94% at stage I). Prevalent CRC cases were 422,407 (0.7% of the Italian population), 90% will not die of CRC. For CRC patients, CF was 56%, 92% at stage I, 71% at stage II, and 35% at stages III-IV. TTC was ≤10 years for all age groups and stages. Already cured were 59% of all prevalent CRC patients (93% at stage I). Cancer cure indicators by stage may contribute to appropriate follow-up in the years after diagnosis, thus avoiding patients' discrimination.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luigino Dal Maso
- Cancer Epidemiology Unit, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Aviano (CRO) IRCCS, Aviano, Italy
| | - Federica Toffolutti
- Cancer Epidemiology Unit, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Aviano (CRO) IRCCS, Aviano, Italy
| | | | - Fabiola Giudici
- Cancer Epidemiology Unit, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Aviano (CRO) IRCCS, Aviano, Italy
| | - Silvia Francisci
- National Centre for Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, National Institute of Health, Rome, Italy
| | - Lauro Bucchi
- Emilia-Romagna Cancer Registry, Romagna Unit, IRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori (IRST) Dino Amadori, Meldola, Forlì, Italy
| | - Manuel Zorzi
- Epidemiological Department, Azienda Zero, Padua, Italy
| | - Mario Fusco
- Registro Tumori ASL Napoli 3 Sud, Napoli, Italy
| | - Adele Caldarella
- Tuscany Cancer Registry, Institute for Cancer Research, Prevention and Clinical Network, Florence, Italy
| | - Silvia Rossi
- Department of Oncology and Molecular Medicine, National Institute of Health, Rome, Italy
| | - Roberta De Angelis
- Department of Oncology and Molecular Medicine, National Institute of Health, Rome, Italy
| | - Laura Botta
- Evaluative Epidemiology Unit, Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Alessandra Ravaioli
- Emilia-Romagna Cancer Registry, Romagna Unit, IRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori (IRST) Dino Amadori, Meldola, Forlì, Italy
| | - Claudia Casella
- Liguria Cancer Registry, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
| | - Antonino Musolino
- Emilia-Romagna Cancer Registry, Parma Unit, Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy
| | | | - Lucia Mangone
- Emilia-Romagna Cancer Registry, Reggio Emilia Unit, Epidemiology Unit, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy
| | - Anna Clara Fanetti
- Sondrio Cancer Registry, Agenzia di Tutela della Salute della Montagna, Sondrio, Italy
| | - Eva Carpin
- Epidemiological Department, Azienda Zero, Padua, Italy
| | - Maria Giovanna Burgio Lo Monaco
- Coordination Centre of the Cancer Registry of Puglia-Strategic Regional Agency for Health and Social Care (AReSS), Bari, Italy
| | - Enrica Migliore
- Piedmont Cancer Registry, Centro di Riferimento per l'Epidemiologia e la Prevenzione Oncologica (CPO) Piemonte and University of Turin, Turin, Italy
| | - Maria Letizia Gambino
- Registro tumori ATS Insubria (Provincia di Como e Varese) S.S. Epidemiologia Registri Specializzati e Reti di Patologia, Varese, Italy
| | - Margherita Ferrante
- Registro Tumori Integrato di Catania-Messina-Enna, Igiene Ospedaliera, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Policlinico G. Rodolico-San Marco, Catania, Italy
| | - Fabrizio Stracci
- Umbria Cancer Registry, Public Health Section, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
| | - Cinzia Gasparotti
- Registro tumori ATS Brescia, Struttura Semplice Epidemiologia, ATS, Brescia, Italy
| | - Giuliano Carrozzi
- Emilia-Romagna Cancer Registry, Modena Unit, Public Health Department, Local Health Authority, Modena, Italy
| | - Rossella Cavallo
- Cancer Registry Azienda Sanitaria Locale (ASL) Salerno, Dipartimento di Prevenzione, Salerno, Italy
| | - Walter Mazzucco
- Clinical Epidemiology and Cancer Registry Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Policlinico (AOUP) di Palermo, Palermo, Italy
| | | | - Stefano Ferretti
- Emilia-Romagna Cancer Registry, Ferrara Unit, Local Health Authority, Ferrara, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Sampietro
- Bergamo Cancer Registry, Epidemiological Service, Agenzia di Tutela della Salute, Bergamo, Italy
| | | | | | - Giuseppe Cascone
- Azienda Sanitaria Provinciale (ASP) Ragusa-Dipartimento di Prevenzione-Registro Tumori, Ragusa, Italy
| | - Michael Mian
- Innovation, Research and Teaching Service (SABES-ASDAA), Lehrkrankenhaus der Paracelsus Medizinischen Privatuniversität, Bolzano-Bozen, Italy
| | - Maria Teresa Pesce
- Monitoraggio Rischio Ambientale e Registro Tumori ASL Caserta, Caserta, Italy
| | | | - Rocco Galasso
- Unit of Regional Cancer Registry, Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, IRCCS Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Basilicata (CROB), Rionero in Vulture, Italy
| | - Francesca Bella
- Siracusa Cancer Registry, Provincial Health Authority of Siracusa, Siracusa, Italy
| | - Pietro Seghini
- Emilia-Romagna Cancer Registry, Piacenza Unit, Public Health Department, AUSL Piacenza, Piacenza, Italy
| | - Pasquala Pinna
- Nuoro Cancer Registry, RT Nuoro, Servizio Igiene e Sanità Pubblica, ASL Nuoro, Nuoro, Italy
| | - Emanuele Crocetti
- Cancer Epidemiology Unit, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Aviano (CRO) IRCCS, Aviano, Italy
| | - Diego Serraino
- Cancer Epidemiology Unit, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Aviano (CRO) IRCCS, Aviano, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Bhatt AA, Niell B. Tumor Doubling Time and Screening Interval. Radiol Clin North Am 2024; 62:571-580. [PMID: 38777534 DOI: 10.1016/j.rcl.2023.12.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/25/2024]
Abstract
The goal of screening is to detect breast cancers when still curable to decrease breast cancer-specific mortality. Breast cancer screening in the United States is routinely performed with digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis. This article reviews breast cancer doubling time by tumor subtype and examines the impact of doubling time on breast cancer screening intervals. By the article's end, the reader will be better equipped to have informed discussions with patients and medical professionals regarding the benefits and disadvantages of the currently recommended screening mammography intervals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Asha A Bhatt
- Moffitt Cancer Center, 12902 Magnolia Drive, Tampa, FL 33612, USA.
| | - Bethany Niell
- Moffitt Cancer Center, 12902 Magnolia Drive, Tampa, FL 33612, USA; Department of Oncologic Sciences, University of South Florida, 12901 Bruce B. Downs Boulevard MDC 44. Tampa, FL 33612, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Madariaga B, Mondschein S, Torres S. Breast cancer trends in Chile: Incidence and mortality rates (2007-2018). PLOS GLOBAL PUBLIC HEALTH 2024; 4:e0001322. [PMID: 38935632 PMCID: PMC11210749 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001322] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2022] [Accepted: 05/14/2024] [Indexed: 06/29/2024]
Abstract
Breast cancer (BC) is one of the most common cancers in women worldwide and in Chile. Due to the lack of a Chilean national cancer registry, there is partial information on the status of BC in the country. We aim to estimate BC incidence and mortality rates by health care providers and regions for Chilean women. We used two public anonymized databases provided by the Ministry of Health: the national death and hospital discharges datasets. We considered a cohort of 58,254 and 16,615 BC hospital discharges and deaths for the period 2007-2018. New BC cases increased by 43.6%, from 3,785 in 2007 to 5,435 in 2018. Total BC deaths increased by 33.6% from 1,158 to 1,547 during the same period. Age-adjusted incidence rates were stable over time, with an average rate of 44.0 cases/100,000 women (SD 2.2). There were considerable differences in age-adjusted incidence rates among regions, with no clear geographical trend. Women affiliated to a private provider (ISAPRE) have an average age-adjusted incidence rate of 60.6 compared to 38.8 (both cases/100,000 women) for women affiliated with the public provider (FONASA). Age-adjusted mortality rates have an average of 10.5 cases/100,000 women (SD 0.4). This study shows important differences in incidence rates between private and publicly insured women, with no significant differences in mortality rates. Such differences may be associated with women's lifestyles, dietary compositions, comorbidities, and differences in healthcare systems. These hypotheses should be studied in greater depth. Additionally, differences in BC incidence found in this study compared to incidences reported from other estimations reinforce the need of a national cancer registry that should lead to more accurate indicators regarding BC in Chile.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjamín Madariaga
- Department of Mathematical Engineering, University of Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Susana Mondschein
- Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Chile, Santiago, Chile
- Instituto Sistemas Complejos de Ingeniería (ISCI), Santiago, Chile
- Center for Cancer Prevention and Control (CECAN), Santiago, Chile
| | - Soledad Torres
- Centro Integral de la Mama, Clínica Las Condes, Santiago, Chile
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Hendrick RE, Monticciolo DL. USPSTF Recommendations and Overdiagnosis. JOURNAL OF BREAST IMAGING 2024:wbae028. [PMID: 38865364 DOI: 10.1093/jbi/wbae028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2024] [Indexed: 06/14/2024]
Abstract
Overdiagnosis is the concept that some cancers detected at screening would never have become clinically apparent during a woman's lifetime in the absence of screening. This could occur if a woman dies of a cause other than breast cancer in the interval between mammographic detection and clinical detection (obligate overdiagnosis) or if a mammographically detected breast cancer fails to progress to clinical presentation. Overdiagnosis cannot be measured directly. Indirect methods of estimating overdiagnosis include use of data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) designed to evaluate breast cancer mortality, population-based screening studies, or modeling. In each case, estimates of overdiagnosis must consider lead time, breast cancer incidence trends in the absence of screening, and accurate and predictable rates of tumor progression. Failure to do so has led to widely varying estimates of overdiagnosis. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) considers overdiagnosis a major harm of mammography screening. Their 2024 report estimated overdiagnosis using summary evaluations of 3 RCTs that did not provide screening to their control groups at the end of the screening period, along with Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Network modeling. However, there are major flaws in their evidence sources and modeling estimates, limiting the USPSTF assessment. The most plausible estimates remain those based on observational studies that suggest overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening is 10% or less and can be attributed primarily to obligate overdiagnosis and nonprogressive ductal carcinoma in situ.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Edward Hendrick
- Department of Radiology, University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Wolf AMD, Oeffinger KC, Shih TYC, Walter LC, Church TR, Fontham ETH, Elkin EB, Etzioni RD, Guerra CE, Perkins RB, Kondo KK, Kratzer TB, Manassaram-Baptiste D, Dahut WL, Smith RA. Screening for lung cancer: 2023 guideline update from the American Cancer Society. CA Cancer J Clin 2024; 74:50-81. [PMID: 37909877 DOI: 10.3322/caac.21811] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 19.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2023] [Accepted: 09/14/2023] [Indexed: 11/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Lung cancer is the leading cause of mortality and person-years of life lost from cancer among US men and women. Early detection has been shown to be associated with reduced lung cancer mortality. Our objective was to update the American Cancer Society (ACS) 2013 lung cancer screening (LCS) guideline for adults at high risk for lung cancer. The guideline is intended to provide guidance for screening to health care providers and their patients who are at high risk for lung cancer due to a history of smoking. The ACS Guideline Development Group (GDG) utilized a systematic review of the LCS literature commissioned for the US Preventive Services Task Force 2021 LCS recommendation update; a second systematic review of lung cancer risk associated with years since quitting smoking (YSQ); literature published since 2021; two Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network-validated lung cancer models to assess the benefits and harms of screening; an epidemiologic and modeling analysis examining the effect of YSQ and aging on lung cancer risk; and an updated analysis of benefit-to-radiation-risk ratios from LCS and follow-up examinations. The GDG also examined disease burden data from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. Formulation of recommendations was based on the quality of the evidence and judgment (incorporating values and preferences) about the balance of benefits and harms. The GDG judged that the overall evidence was moderate and sufficient to support a strong recommendation for screening individuals who meet the eligibility criteria. LCS in men and women aged 50-80 years is associated with a reduction in lung cancer deaths across a range of study designs, and inferential evidence supports LCS for men and women older than 80 years who are in good health. The ACS recommends annual LCS with low-dose computed tomography for asymptomatic individuals aged 50-80 years who currently smoke or formerly smoked and have a ≥20 pack-year smoking history (strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence). Before the decision is made to initiate LCS, individuals should engage in a shared decision-making discussion with a qualified health professional. For individuals who formerly smoked, the number of YSQ is not an eligibility criterion to begin or to stop screening. Individuals who currently smoke should receive counseling to quit and be connected to cessation resources. Individuals with comorbid conditions that substantially limit life expectancy should not be screened. These recommendations should be considered by health care providers and adults at high risk for lung cancer in discussions about LCS. If fully implemented, these recommendations have a high likelihood of significantly reducing death and suffering from lung cancer in the United States.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew M D Wolf
- University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA
| | - Kevin C Oeffinger
- Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine and Duke Cancer Institute Center for Onco-Primary Care, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Tina Ya-Chen Shih
- David Geffen School of Medicine and Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Louise C Walter
- Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco and San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Timothy R Church
- Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Elizabeth T H Fontham
- Health Sciences Center, School of Public Health, Louisiana State University, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
| | - Elena B Elkin
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, New York, USA
| | - Ruth D Etzioni
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Carmen E Guerra
- Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Rebecca B Perkins
- Obstetrics and Gynecology, Boston University Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Karli K Kondo
- Early Cancer Detection Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Tyler B Kratzer
- Cancer Surveillance and Health Equity Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | | | | | - Robert A Smith
- Early Cancer Detection Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Tollens F, Baltzer PA, Froelich MF, Kaiser CG. Economic evaluation of breast MRI in screening - a systematic review and basic approach to cost-effectiveness analyses. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1292268. [PMID: 38130995 PMCID: PMC10733447 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1292268] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2023] [Accepted: 11/20/2023] [Indexed: 12/23/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Economic evaluations have become an accepted methodology for decision makers to allocate resources in healthcare systems. Particularly in screening, where short-term costs are associated with long-term benefits, and adverse effects of screening intermingle, cost-effectiveness analyses provide a means to estimate the economic value of screening. Purpose To introduce the methodology of economic evaluations and to review the existing evidence on cost-effectiveness of MR-based breast cancer screening. Materials and methods The various concepts and techniques of economic evaluations critical to the interpretation of cost-effectiveness analyses are briefly introduced. In a systematic review of the literature, economic evaluations from the years 2000-2022 are reviewed. Results Despite a considerable heterogeneity in the reported input variables, outcome categories and methodological approaches, cost-effectiveness analyses report favorably on the economic value of breast MRI screening for different risk groups, including both short- and long-term costs and outcomes. Conclusion Economic evaluations indicate a strongly favorable economic value of breast MRI screening for women at high risk and for women with dense breast tissue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fabian Tollens
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Centre Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Pascal A.T. Baltzer
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Matthias F. Froelich
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Centre Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Clemens G. Kaiser
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Centre Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Plasencia-Martínez JM, Sánchez-Canales M, Otón-González E, Casado-Alarcón NI, Molina-Lozano B, Cotillo-Ramos E, Ortiz-Mayoral H, García-Santos JM. Inappropriate requests for cranial CT scans in emergency departments increase overuse and reduce test performance. Emerg Radiol 2023; 30:733-741. [PMID: 37973624 DOI: 10.1007/s10140-023-02185-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2023] [Accepted: 11/01/2023] [Indexed: 11/19/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The number of non-traumatic urgent cranial computed tomography (NT-UCCT) is exponentially increasing but limited research has been conducted on the quality of clinical justification. Accordingly, we aimed (1) to assess how clinical information in the electronic NT-UCCT request agreed with that provided in the patient's emergency department discharge summary and (2) to analyze the potential effect of those discrepancies on the NT-UCCT overload. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients undergoing NT-UCCT in 2017-2021 were randomly selected for this retrospective research-board-approved study. Signs and symptoms (S/S) in electronic request and emergency department discharge summary, acute and relevant computed tomography (CT) findings (acute ischemia or hemorrhage, masses, brain edema, or previously undetected hydrocephalus), and final diagnosis at emergency department discharge summary were collected. Concordance between digital request and emergency department discharge summary and their association with both acute and relevant CT findings and final diagnosis were analyzed. RESULTS We recruited 156 patients: 80 men; mean age, 55. Acute, relevant CT findings were detected in 28 cases (17.9%). The final diagnosis was neurological disease, non-neurological disease, and no definitive diagnosis in 46 (29.5%), 58 (37.2%), and 51 (32.7%) cases, respectively. Full agreement between the electronic request and emergency department discharge summary occurred in only 36 patients (23.1%). Motor deficit was the most frequent false positive electronic request S/S (18; 11.54%), having low positive predictive value (30.30%; 95%CI 15.59-48.71%) and worst association with acute relevant CT findings than when true positive (OR 2.54; 95%CI 0.04-6.21 vs. OR 6.26, 95%CI 2.21-17.78). Nausea/vomiting was the third most common false negative electronic request S/S (13; 10.26%) and reduced the likelihood of acute and relevant CT findings (OR 0.126; 95%CI 0.016-0.971; p = 0.020). False S/S in electronic request predominated in non-neurological diseases (50-60.2% vs. 33-39.8%; p = 0.068). CONCLUSION Discrepancies between electronic request and emergency department discharge summary were observed in >75% of patients, leading to unnecessary NT-UCCT tests.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juana María Plasencia-Martínez
- Department of Radiology, Hospital General Universitario Morales Meseguer, Avenida Marqués de los Vélez, s/n, 30008, Murcia, Spain.
| | - Marta Sánchez-Canales
- Department of Radiology, Hospital General Universitario Morales Meseguer, Avenida Marqués de los Vélez, s/n, 30008, Murcia, Spain
| | - Elena Otón-González
- Department of Radiology, Hospital General Universitario Morales Meseguer, Avenida Marqués de los Vélez, s/n, 30008, Murcia, Spain
| | - Nuria Isabel Casado-Alarcón
- Department of Radiology, Hospital General Universitario Morales Meseguer, Avenida Marqués de los Vélez, s/n, 30008, Murcia, Spain
| | | | - Estefanía Cotillo-Ramos
- Department of Radiology, Hospital General Universitario Morales Meseguer, Avenida Marqués de los Vélez, s/n, 30008, Murcia, Spain
| | - Herminia Ortiz-Mayoral
- Department of Radiology, Hospital General Universitario Morales Meseguer, Avenida Marqués de los Vélez, s/n, 30008, Murcia, Spain
| | - José María García-Santos
- Department of Radiology, Hospital General Universitario Morales Meseguer, Avenida Marqués de los Vélez, s/n, 30008, Murcia, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Weigel S, Heindel W, Decker T, Weyer-Elberich V, Kerschke L, Gerß J, Hense HW. Digital Breast Tomosynthesis versus Digital Mammography for Detection of Early-Stage Cancers Stratified by Grade: A TOSYMA Subanalysis. Radiology 2023; 309:e231533. [PMID: 38051184 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.231533] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/07/2023]
Abstract
Background Breast cancer screening with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) plus synthesized mammography (SM) increases invasive tumor detection compared with digital mammography (DM). However, it is not known how the prognostic characteristics of the cancers detected with the two screening approaches differ. Purpose To compare invasive breast cancers detected with DBT plus SM (test arm) versus DM (control arm) screening with regard to tumor stage, histologic grade, patient age, and breast density. Materials and Methods This exploratory subanalysis of the Tomosynthesis plus Synthesized Mammography (TOSYMA) study, which is a multicenter randomized controlled trial embedded in the German mammography screening program, recruited women aged 50-70 years from July 2018 to December 2020. It compared invasive cancer detection rates (iCDRs), rate differences, and odds ratios (ORs) between the arms stratified by Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) stage (I vs II-IV), histologic grade (1 vs 2 or 3), age group (50-59 vs 60-70 years), and Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System categories of breast density (A or B vs C or D). Results In total, 49 462 (median age, 57 years [IQR, 53-62 years]) and 49 669 (median age, 57 years [IQR, 53-62 years]) participants were allocated to DBT plus SM and DM screening, respectively. The iCDR of stage I tumors with DBT plus SM was 51.6 per 10 000 women (255 of 49 462) and with DM it was 30.0 per 10 000 women (149 of 49 669). DBT plus SM depicted more stage I tumors with grade 2 or 3 (166 of 49 462, 33.7 per 10 000 women) than DM (106 of 49 669, 21.3 per 10 000 women; rate difference, +12.3 per 10 000 women [95% CI: 0.3, 24.9]; OR, 1.6 [95% CI: 0.9, 2.7]). DBT plus SM achieved the highest iCDR of stage I tumors with grade 2 or 3 among women aged 60-70 years with dense breasts (41 of 7364, 55.4 per 10 000 women; rate difference, +21.6 per 10 000 women [95% CI: -21.1, 64.3]; OR, 1.6 [95% CI: 0.6, 4.5]). Conclusion DBT plus SM screening appears to lead to higher detection of early-stage invasive breast cancers of grade 2 or 3 than DM screening, with the highest rate among women aged 60-70 years with dense breasts. Clinical trial registration no. NCT03377036 © RSNA, 2023 See also the editorial by Ha and Chang in this issue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stefanie Weigel
- From the Clinic for Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography Münster (S.W., W.H., T.D.), Institute of Biostatistics and Clinical Research (V.W.E., L.K., J.G.), and Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine (H.W.H.), University of Münster and University Hospital Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Building A1, D-48149 Münster, Germany
| | - Walter Heindel
- From the Clinic for Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography Münster (S.W., W.H., T.D.), Institute of Biostatistics and Clinical Research (V.W.E., L.K., J.G.), and Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine (H.W.H.), University of Münster and University Hospital Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Building A1, D-48149 Münster, Germany
| | - Thomas Decker
- From the Clinic for Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography Münster (S.W., W.H., T.D.), Institute of Biostatistics and Clinical Research (V.W.E., L.K., J.G.), and Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine (H.W.H.), University of Münster and University Hospital Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Building A1, D-48149 Münster, Germany
| | - Veronika Weyer-Elberich
- From the Clinic for Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography Münster (S.W., W.H., T.D.), Institute of Biostatistics and Clinical Research (V.W.E., L.K., J.G.), and Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine (H.W.H.), University of Münster and University Hospital Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Building A1, D-48149 Münster, Germany
| | - Laura Kerschke
- From the Clinic for Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography Münster (S.W., W.H., T.D.), Institute of Biostatistics and Clinical Research (V.W.E., L.K., J.G.), and Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine (H.W.H.), University of Münster and University Hospital Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Building A1, D-48149 Münster, Germany
| | - Joachim Gerß
- From the Clinic for Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography Münster (S.W., W.H., T.D.), Institute of Biostatistics and Clinical Research (V.W.E., L.K., J.G.), and Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine (H.W.H.), University of Münster and University Hospital Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Building A1, D-48149 Münster, Germany
| | - Hans-Werner Hense
- From the Clinic for Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography Münster (S.W., W.H., T.D.), Institute of Biostatistics and Clinical Research (V.W.E., L.K., J.G.), and Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine (H.W.H.), University of Münster and University Hospital Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Building A1, D-48149 Münster, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Hill H, Kearns B, Pashayan N, Roadevin C, Sasieni P, Offman J, Duffy S. The cost-effectiveness of risk-stratified breast cancer screening in the UK. Br J Cancer 2023; 129:1801-1809. [PMID: 37848734 PMCID: PMC10667489 DOI: 10.1038/s41416-023-02461-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/03/2022] [Revised: 09/09/2023] [Accepted: 10/04/2023] [Indexed: 10/19/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harry Hill
- School of Medicine and Population Health, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, England.
| | - Ben Kearns
- School of Medicine and Population Health, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, England
- Lumanity Inc, Sheffield, England
| | - Nora Pashayan
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, England
| | - Cristina Roadevin
- Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, England
| | - Peter Sasieni
- Life Sciences & Medicine, King's College London, London, England
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, England
| | - Judith Offman
- Life Sciences & Medicine, King's College London, London, England
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, England
| | - Stephen Duffy
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, England
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Wilkinson AN, Ellison LF, Billette JM, Seely JM. Impact of Breast Cancer Screening on 10-Year Net Survival in Canadian Women Age 40-49 Years. J Clin Oncol 2023; 41:4669-4677. [PMID: 37540825 PMCID: PMC10564321 DOI: 10.1200/jco.23.00348] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2023] [Revised: 05/26/2023] [Accepted: 06/15/2023] [Indexed: 08/06/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE In Canada, some provincial/territorial mammography screening programs include women age 40-49 years, whereas others do not. This study examines the impact of this dichotomy on the 10-year breast cancer (BC) net survival (NS) among women age 40-49 years and 50-59 years at diagnosis. METHODS Using the Canadian Cancer Registry data record linked to death information, we evaluated the cohort of Canadian women age 40-49 years and 50-59 years diagnosed with BC from 2002 to 2007. We compared 10-year NS estimates in the jurisdictions with organized screening programs that included women age 40-49 years, designated as screeners (Northwest Territories, British Columbia, Alberta, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island), with comparator programs that did not (Yukon, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, and Newfoundland and Labrador). RESULTS BC was the primary cause of 10-year mortality in women age 40-49 years diagnosed with BC (90.7% of deaths). Among these women, the 10-year NS for screeners (84.8%; 95% CI, 83.8 to 85.8) was 1.9 percentage points (pp) higher than that for comparators (82.9%; 95% CI, 82.3 to 83.5; P = .001). The difference in favor of screeners was significant among women age 45-49 years (2.6 pp; P = .001) but not among women age 40-44 years (0.9 pp; P = .328). Similarly, the incidence-based BC mortality rate was significantly lower in screener jurisdictions among women age 40-49 years and 45-49 years, but not for 40-44 years. Provincial/territorial NS increased significantly with higher mammography screening participation (P = .003). The BC incidence rate was virtually identical in screener and comparator jurisdictions among women age 40-49 years (P = .976) but was significantly higher for comparators among women age 50-59 years (P < .001). CONCLUSION Screening programs that included women in their 40s were associated with a significantly higher BC 10-year NS in women age 40-49 years, but not an increased rate of BC diagnosis. These results may inform screening guidelines for women age 40-49 years.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Larry F. Ellison
- Centre for Population Health Data at Statistics Canada, Government of Canada, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Jean-Michel Billette
- Centre for Population Health Data at Statistics Canada, Government of Canada, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Jean M. Seely
- University of Ottawa, Department of Radiology, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Lee CS, Lewin A, Reig B, Heacock L, Gao Y, Heller S, Moy L. Women 75 Years Old or Older: To Screen or Not to Screen? Radiographics 2023; 43:e220166. [PMID: 37053102 DOI: 10.1148/rg.220166] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/14/2023]
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women, with the incidence rising substantially with age. Older women are a vulnerable population at increased risk of developing and dying from breast cancer. However, women aged 75 years and older were excluded from all randomized controlled screening trials, so the best available data regarding screening benefits and risks in this age group are from observational studies and modeling predictions. Benefits of screening in older women are the same as those in younger women: early detection of smaller lower-stage cancers, resulting in less invasive treatment and lower morbidity and mortality. Mammography performs significantly better in older women with higher sensitivity, specificity, cancer detection rate, and positive predictive values, accompanied by lower recall rates and false positives. The overdiagnosis rate is low, with benefits outweighing risks until age 90 years. Although there are conflicting national and international guidelines about whether to continue screening mammography in women beyond age 74 years, clinicians can use shared decision making to help women make decisions about screening and fully engage them in the screening process. For women aged 75 years and older in good health, continuing annual screening mammography will save the most lives. An informed discussion of the benefits and risks of screening mammography in older women needs to include each woman's individual values, overall health status, and comorbidities. This article will review the benefits, risks, and controversies surrounding screening mammography in women 75 years old and older and compare the current recommendations for screening this population from national and international professional organizations. ©RSNA, 2023 Quiz questions for this article are available through the Online Learning Center.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cindy S Lee
- From the Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (C.S.L., A.L., B.R., L.H., Y.G., S.H., L.M.); and Center for Advanced Imaging Innovation and Research, Vilcek Institute of Graduate Biomedical Sciences, New York, NY (L.M.)
| | - Alana Lewin
- From the Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (C.S.L., A.L., B.R., L.H., Y.G., S.H., L.M.); and Center for Advanced Imaging Innovation and Research, Vilcek Institute of Graduate Biomedical Sciences, New York, NY (L.M.)
| | - Beatriu Reig
- From the Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (C.S.L., A.L., B.R., L.H., Y.G., S.H., L.M.); and Center for Advanced Imaging Innovation and Research, Vilcek Institute of Graduate Biomedical Sciences, New York, NY (L.M.)
| | - Laura Heacock
- From the Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (C.S.L., A.L., B.R., L.H., Y.G., S.H., L.M.); and Center for Advanced Imaging Innovation and Research, Vilcek Institute of Graduate Biomedical Sciences, New York, NY (L.M.)
| | - Yiming Gao
- From the Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (C.S.L., A.L., B.R., L.H., Y.G., S.H., L.M.); and Center for Advanced Imaging Innovation and Research, Vilcek Institute of Graduate Biomedical Sciences, New York, NY (L.M.)
| | - Samantha Heller
- From the Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (C.S.L., A.L., B.R., L.H., Y.G., S.H., L.M.); and Center for Advanced Imaging Innovation and Research, Vilcek Institute of Graduate Biomedical Sciences, New York, NY (L.M.)
| | - Linda Moy
- From the Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (C.S.L., A.L., B.R., L.H., Y.G., S.H., L.M.); and Center for Advanced Imaging Innovation and Research, Vilcek Institute of Graduate Biomedical Sciences, New York, NY (L.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Bolarinwa OA, Holt N. Barriers to breast and cervical cancer screening uptake among Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic women in the United Kingdom: evidence from a mixed-methods systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res 2023; 23:390. [PMID: 37087506 PMCID: PMC10122823 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-023-09410-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/02/2023] [Accepted: 04/17/2023] [Indexed: 04/24/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cancer is currently the leading cause of mortality globally, with new cancer cases estimated at 19.3 million and almost 10 million deaths in 2020. Specifically, breast and cervical cancer incidence and mortality prevalence among women of the minority group or marginalised populations in Europe have continued to be a public health concern due to the low uptake of cancer screening. Thus, this study utilised a mixed-method systematic review to identify barriers to breast and cervical screening uptake among Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic women in the United Kingdom. METHODS Databases including PubMed, CINAHL, British Nursing Index, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Scopus databases, were systematically searched for studies on barriers to breast and cervical screening uptake among Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic women in the United Kingdom published in English between January 2010 to July 2022. This mixed-method systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines in reporting the included studies' results. The cluster mapping approach was used to identify and classify the barriers into themes. RESULTS Thirteen eligible studies were included in this current review. Seven of the thirteen studies used quantitative cross-sectional research design, while six used qualitative cross-sectional research design. These studies were conducted across the United Kingdom. Five themes were developed from the cluster mapping, and thirty-four sub-theme barriers to the uptake of breast and cervical cancer screening among Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic women in the United Kingdom were identified. The developed themes in relation to the barriers include; socio-demographic characteristics, health service delivery, cultural, religious & language, the gap in knowledge & awareness, and emotional, sexual & family support. CONCLUSION The study concluded that barriers in socio-demographic characteristics, health service delivery, cultural, religious and language, the gap in knowledge & awareness, and emotional, sexual & family support were identified as non-uptake of breast and cervical cancer screening among Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic women in the United Kingdom. Reducing or eliminating these barriers would improve the benefits of timely breast and cervical cancer screening in the United Kingdom.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Obasanjo Afolabi Bolarinwa
- Department of Public Health & Well-Being, Faculty of Health & Social Care, University of Chester, Chester, UK.
- Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
- Discipline of Public Health Medicine, School of Nursing and Public Health, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
- Department of Allied and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Social Care, Canterbury Christ Church University, Canterbury, UK.
| | - Nicole Holt
- Department of Allied and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Social Care, Canterbury Christ Church University, Canterbury, UK
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Flemban AF. Overdiagnosis Due to Screening Mammography for Breast Cancer among Women Aged 40 Years and Over: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Pers Med 2023; 13:jpm13030523. [PMID: 36983705 PMCID: PMC10051653 DOI: 10.3390/jpm13030523] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/29/2022] [Revised: 02/03/2023] [Accepted: 03/11/2023] [Indexed: 03/16/2023] Open
Abstract
The current systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the incidence of overdiagnosis due to screening mammography for breast cancer among women aged 40 years and older. A PRISMA systematic search appraisal and meta-analysis were conducted. A systematic literature search of English publications in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Scopus, and Google Scholar was conducted without regard to the region or time period. Generic, methodological, and statistical data were extracted from the eligible studies. A meta-analysis was completed by utilizing comprehensive meta-analysis software. The effect size estimates were calculated using the fail-safe N test. The funnel plot and the Begg and Mazumdar rank correlation tests were employed to find any potential bias among the included articles. The strength of the association between two variables was assessed using Kendall’s tau. Heterogeneity was measured using the I-squared (I2) test. The literature search in the five databases yielded a total of 4214 studies. Of those, 30 articles were included in the final analysis, with sample sizes ranging from 451 to 1,429,890 women. The vast majority of the articles were retrospective cohort designs (24 articles). The age of the recruited women ranged between 40 and 89 years old. The incidence of overdiagnosis due to screening mammography for breast cancer among women aged 40 years and older was 12.6%. There was high heterogeneity among the study articles (I2 = 99.993), and the pooled event rate was 0.126 (95% CI: 15 0.101–0.156). Despite the random-effects meta-analysis showing a high degree of heterogeneity among the articles, the screening tests have to allow for a certain degree of overdiagnosis (12.6%) due to screening mammography for breast cancer among women aged 40 years and older. Furthermore, efforts should be directed toward controlling and minimizing the harmful consequences associated with breast cancer screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arwa F Flemban
- Pathology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah 21955, Saudi Arabia
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Mao N, Zhang H, Dai Y, Li Q, Lin F, Gao J, Zheng T, Zhao F, Xie H, Xu C, Ma H. Attention-based deep learning for breast lesions classification on contrast enhanced spectral mammography: a multicentre study. Br J Cancer 2023; 128:793-804. [PMID: 36522478 PMCID: PMC9977865 DOI: 10.1038/s41416-022-02092-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/01/2022] [Revised: 11/21/2022] [Accepted: 11/24/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study aims to develop an attention-based deep learning model for distinguishing benign from malignant breast lesions on CESM. METHODS Preoperative CESM images of 1239 patients, which were definitely diagnosed on pathology in a multicentre cohort, were divided into training and validation sets, internal and external test sets. The regions of interest of the breast lesions were outlined manually by a senior radiologist. We adopted three conventional convolutional neural networks (CNNs), namely, DenseNet 121, Xception, and ResNet 50, as the backbone architectures and incorporated the convolutional block attention module (CBAM) into them for classification. The performance of the models was analysed in terms of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, accuracy, the positive predictive value (PPV), the negative predictive value (NPV), the F1 score, the precision recall curve (PRC), and heat maps. The final models were compared with the diagnostic performance of conventional CNNs, radiomics models, and two radiologists with specialised breast imaging experience. RESULTS The best-performing deep learning model, that is, the CBAM-based Xception, achieved an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.970, a sensitivity of 0.848, a specificity of 1.000, and an accuracy of 0.891 on the external test set, which was higher than those of other CNNs, radiomics models, and radiologists. The PRC and the heat maps also indicated the favourable predictive performance of the attention-based CNN model. The diagnostic performance of two radiologists improved with deep learning assistance. CONCLUSIONS Using an attention-based deep learning model based on CESM images can help to distinguishing benign from malignant breast lesions, and the diagnostic performance of radiologists improved with deep learning assistance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ning Mao
- Department of Radiology, Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Qingdao University, 264000, Yantai, Shandong, P. R. China
- Big Data and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Qingdao University, 264000, Yantai, Shandong, P. R. China
| | - Haicheng Zhang
- Big Data and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Qingdao University, 264000, Yantai, Shandong, P. R. China
| | - Yi Dai
- Department of Radiology, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, 518000, Shenzhen, P. R. China
| | - Qin Li
- Department of Radiology, Fudan University Cancer Center, 200433, Shanghai, P. R. China
| | - Fan Lin
- Department of Radiology, Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Qingdao University, 264000, Yantai, Shandong, P. R. China
| | - Jing Gao
- Department of Radiology, Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Qingdao University, 264000, Yantai, Shandong, P. R. China
| | - Tiantian Zheng
- Department of Radiology, Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Qingdao University, 264000, Yantai, Shandong, P. R. China
| | - Feng Zhao
- School of Computer Science and Technology, Shandong Technology and Business University, 264005, Yantai, Shandong, P. R. China
| | - Haizhu Xie
- Department of Radiology, Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Qingdao University, 264000, Yantai, Shandong, P. R. China
| | - Cong Xu
- Physical Examination Center, Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Qingdao University, 264000, Yantai, Shandong, P. R. China.
| | - Heng Ma
- Department of Radiology, Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Qingdao University, 264000, Yantai, Shandong, P. R. China.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Cui Z, Kawasaki H, Tsunematsu M, Cui Y, Rahman MM, Yamasaki S, Li Y, Kakehashi M. Breast Cancer Screening and Perceptions of Harm among Young Adults in Japan: Results of a Cross-Sectional Online Survey. Curr Oncol 2023; 30:2073-2087. [PMID: 36826122 PMCID: PMC9955860 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol30020161] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2022] [Revised: 01/30/2023] [Accepted: 02/07/2023] [Indexed: 02/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed female cancer and the leading cause of cancer death. Early detection and treatment are important to reduce the number of deaths. Japan recommends mammography every two years for women over 40 years of age. However, in recent years, an increasing number of younger women have been undergoing breast cancer screening (BCS). To reduce the harms of BCS among young adults, our study extracted data from an online survey conducted in 2018 and applied χ2 tests and logistic analysis to identify the influencing factors regarding interest in undergoing BCS. The results of our analysis support the need for a reduction in the BCS rate through awareness regarding the harms of health screening among young people. In particular, for those who receive BCS through occupational screening, we believe that improving education on breast awareness, the accuracy of occupational screening, and breast self-examination methods could reduce the harms from BCS in younger age groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhengai Cui
- Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima 734-8551, Japan
- Correspondence:
| | - Hiromi Kawasaki
- Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima 734-8551, Japan
| | - Miwako Tsunematsu
- Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima 734-8551, Japan
| | - Yingai Cui
- School of Nursing, Guangdong Medical University, Dongguan 523808, China
| | - Md Moshiur Rahman
- Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima 734-8551, Japan
| | - Satoko Yamasaki
- Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima 734-8551, Japan
| | - Yuan Li
- Financial Department, Guangdong Medical University, Dongguan 523808, China
| | - Masayuki Kakehashi
- Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima 734-8551, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Weigel S, Heindel W, Hense HW, Decker T, Gerß J, Kerschke L. Breast Density and Breast Cancer Screening with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: A TOSYMA Trial Subanalysis. Radiology 2023; 306:e221006. [PMID: 36194110 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.221006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/26/2023]
Abstract
Background Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) plus synthesized mammography (SM) reduces the diagnostic pitfalls of tissue superimposition, which is a limitation of digital mammography (DM). Purpose To compare the invasive breast cancer detection rate (iCDR) of DBT plus SM versus DM screening for different breast density categories. Materials and Methods An exploratory subanalysis of the TOmosynthesis plus SYnthesized MAmmography (TOSYMA) study, a randomized, controlled, multicenter, parallel-group trial recruited within the German mammography screening program from July 2018 to December 2020. Women aged 50-69 years were randomly assigned (1:1) to DBT plus SM or DM screening examination. Breast density categories A-D were visually assessed according to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Atlas. Exploratory analyses were performed of the iCDR in both study arms and stratified by breast density, and odds ratios and 95% CIs were determined. Results A total of 49 762 women allocated to DBT plus SM and 49 796 allocated to DM (median age, 57 years [IQR, 53-62 years]) were included. In the DM arm, the iCDR was 3.6 per 1000 screening examinations in category A (almost entirely fatty) (16 of 4475 screenings), 4.3 in category B (102 of 23 534 screenings), 6.1 in category C (116 of 19 051 screenings), and 2.3 in category D (extremely dense breasts) (six of 2629 screenings). The iCDR in the DBT plus SM arm was 2.7 per 1000 screening examinations in category A (12 of 4439 screenings), 6.9 in category B (154 of 22 328 screenings), 8.3 in category C (156 of 18 772 screenings), and 8.1 in category D (32 of 3940 screenings). The odds ratio for DM versus DBT plus SM in category D was 3.8 (95% CI: 1.5, 11.1). The invasive cancers detected with DBT plus SM were most often grade 2 tumors; in category C, it was 58% (91 of 156 invasive cancers), and in category D, it was 47% (15 of 32 invasive cancers). Conclusion The TOmosynthesis plus SYnthesized MAmmography trial revealed higher invasive cancer detection rates with digital breast tomosynthesis plus synthesized mammography than digital mammography in dense breasts, relatively and absolutely most marked among women with extremely dense breasts. ClinicalTrials.gov registration no.: NCT03377036 © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Lee and Moy in this issue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stefanie Weigel
- From the Clinic for Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography Münster, University of Münster and University Hospital Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Building A1, D-48149 Münster, Germany (S.W., W.H., T.D.); Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine, University of Münster, Münster, Germany (H.W.H.); and Institute of Biostatistics and Clinical Research, University of Münster, Münster, Germany (J.G., L.K.)
| | - Walter Heindel
- From the Clinic for Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography Münster, University of Münster and University Hospital Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Building A1, D-48149 Münster, Germany (S.W., W.H., T.D.); Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine, University of Münster, Münster, Germany (H.W.H.); and Institute of Biostatistics and Clinical Research, University of Münster, Münster, Germany (J.G., L.K.)
| | - Hans-Werner Hense
- From the Clinic for Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography Münster, University of Münster and University Hospital Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Building A1, D-48149 Münster, Germany (S.W., W.H., T.D.); Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine, University of Münster, Münster, Germany (H.W.H.); and Institute of Biostatistics and Clinical Research, University of Münster, Münster, Germany (J.G., L.K.)
| | - Thomas Decker
- From the Clinic for Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography Münster, University of Münster and University Hospital Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Building A1, D-48149 Münster, Germany (S.W., W.H., T.D.); Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine, University of Münster, Münster, Germany (H.W.H.); and Institute of Biostatistics and Clinical Research, University of Münster, Münster, Germany (J.G., L.K.)
| | - Joachim Gerß
- From the Clinic for Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography Münster, University of Münster and University Hospital Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Building A1, D-48149 Münster, Germany (S.W., W.H., T.D.); Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine, University of Münster, Münster, Germany (H.W.H.); and Institute of Biostatistics and Clinical Research, University of Münster, Münster, Germany (J.G., L.K.)
| | - Laura Kerschke
- From the Clinic for Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography Münster, University of Münster and University Hospital Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Building A1, D-48149 Münster, Germany (S.W., W.H., T.D.); Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine, University of Münster, Münster, Germany (H.W.H.); and Institute of Biostatistics and Clinical Research, University of Münster, Münster, Germany (J.G., L.K.)
| | -
- From the Clinic for Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography Münster, University of Münster and University Hospital Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Building A1, D-48149 Münster, Germany (S.W., W.H., T.D.); Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine, University of Münster, Münster, Germany (H.W.H.); and Institute of Biostatistics and Clinical Research, University of Münster, Münster, Germany (J.G., L.K.)
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Blyuss O, Dibden A, Massat NJ, Parmar D, Cuzick J, Duffy SW, Sasieni P. A case-control study to evaluate the impact of the breast screening programme on breast cancer incidence in England. Cancer Med 2023; 12:1878-1887. [PMID: 35851849 PMCID: PMC9883434 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.5004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2022] [Revised: 06/14/2022] [Accepted: 06/19/2022] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND There is uncertainty about overdiagnosis in mammography screening. METHODS We aimed to estimate the effect of screening on breast cancer incidence and overdiagnosis in the NHS Breast Screening Programme in England. The study included 57,493 cases and 105,653 controls, with cases defined as women diagnosed at ages 47-89 with primary breast cancer, invasive or ductal carcinoma in situ, in 2010 or 2011. Where possible, two controls were selected per case, matched on date of birth and screening area. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate the effect of screening on breast cancer risk, with adjustment for potential self-selection bias. Results were combined with national incidence data to estimate absolute rates of overdiagnosis. Overdiagnosis was calculated as the cumulative excess of cancers diagnosed in the age group 50-77 in a woman attending three-yearly screening between ages 50 and 70 compared with a woman attending no screens. RESULTS The estimated number of cases overdiagnosed in women attending all screens in the programme was 679.3 per 100,000 without adjustment for self-selection bias and 261.2 per 100,000 with adjustment. These corresponded to an estimated 9.5% of screen-detected cancers overdiagnosed without adjustment and 3.7% with adjustment for self-selection. CONCLUSIONS The NHS Breast Screening Programme in England confers at worst modest levels of overdiagnosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Oleg Blyuss
- Centre for Prevention, Detection, and Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population HealthQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUK
| | - Amanda Dibden
- Centre for Prevention, Detection, and Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population HealthQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUK
| | - Nathalie J. Massat
- Centre for Prevention, Detection, and Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population HealthQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUK
| | - Dharmishta Parmar
- Centre for Prevention, Detection, and Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population HealthQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUK
| | - Jack Cuzick
- Centre for Prevention, Detection, and Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population HealthQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUK
| | - Stephen W. Duffy
- Centre for Prevention, Detection, and Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population HealthQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUK
| | - Peter Sasieni
- School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and MedicineKing's College LondonLondonUK
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Physical imaging parameter variation drives domain shift. Sci Rep 2022; 12:21302. [PMID: 36494393 PMCID: PMC9734181 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-23990-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2022] [Accepted: 11/09/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Statistical learning algorithms strongly rely on an oversimplified assumption for optimal performance, that is, source (training) and target (testing) data are independent and identically distributed. Variation in human tissue, physician labeling and physical imaging parameters (PIPs) in the generative process, yield medical image datasets with statistics that render this central assumption false. When deploying models, new examples are often out of distribution with respect to training data, thus, training robust dependable and predictive models is still a challenge in medical imaging with significant accuracy drops common for deployed models. This statistical variation between training and testing data is referred to as domain shift (DS).To the best of our knowledge we provide the first empirical evidence that variation in PIPs between test and train medical image datasets is a significant driver of DS and model generalization error is correlated with this variance. We show significant covariate shift occurs due to a selection bias in sampling from a small area of PIP space for both inter and intra-hospital regimes. In order to show this, we control for population shift, prevalence shift, data selection biases and annotation biases to investigate the sole effect of the physical generation process on model generalization for a proxy task of age group estimation on a combined 44 k image mammogram dataset collected from five hospitals.We hypothesize that training data should be sampled evenly from PIP space to produce the most robust models and hope this study provides motivation to retain medical image generation metadata that is almost always discarded or redacted in open source datasets. This metadata measured with standard international units can provide a universal regularizing anchor between distributions generated across the world for all current and future imaging modalities.
Collapse
|
24
|
Piessens V, Heytens S, Van Den Bruel A, Van Hecke A, De Sutter A. Do doctors and other healthcare professionals know overdiagnosis in screening and how are they dealing with it? A protocol for a mixed methods systematic review. BMJ Open 2022; 12:e054267. [PMID: 36220316 PMCID: PMC9557257 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054267] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Overdiagnosis is the diagnosis of a disease that would never have caused any symptom or problem. It is a harmful side effect of screening and may lead to unnecessary treatment, costs and emotional drawbacks. Doctors and other healthcare professionals (HCPs) have the opportunity to mitigate these consequences, not only by informing their patients or the public but also by adjusting screening methods or even by refraining from screening. However, it is unclear to what extent HCPs are fully aware of overdiagnosis and whether it affects their screening decisions. With this systematic review, we aim to synthesise all available research about what HCPs know and think about overdiagnosis, how it affects their position on screening policy and whether they think patients and the public should be informed about it. METHODS AND ANALYSIS We will systematically search several databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL and PsycArticles) for studies that directly examine HCPs' knowledge and subjective perceptions of overdiagnosis due to health screening, both qualitatively and quantitatively. We will optimise our search by scanning reference and citation lists, contacting experts in the field and hand searching abstracts from the annual conference on 'Preventing Overdiagnosis'. After selection and quality appraisal, we will analyse qualitative and quantitative findings separately in a segregated design for mixed-method reviews. The data will be examined and presented descriptively. If the retrieved studies allow it, we will review them from a constructivist perspective through a critical interpretive synthesis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION For this type of research, no ethical approval is required. Findings from this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at the annual congress of 'Preventing Overdiagnosis'. In addition, the results will serve as guidance for further research on this topic. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42021244513.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Veerle Piessens
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Stefan Heytens
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Ann Van Den Bruel
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Flanders, Belgium
| | - Ann Van Hecke
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - An De Sutter
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Ding L, Greuter MJW, Truyen I, Goossens M, Van der Vegt B, De Schutter H, Van Hal G, de Bock GH. Effectiveness of Organized Mammography Screening for Different Breast Cancer Molecular Subtypes. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14194831. [PMID: 36230754 PMCID: PMC9562677 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14194831] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/19/2022] [Accepted: 09/30/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary We evaluated the short-term effectiveness of a mammography screening program in all women who participated in the screening program and were diagnosed with screen-detected or interval breast cancer (BC) in Flanders (2008–2018). The evaluation was performed for the major molecular subtypes of invasive BC separately and considering the regularity of participation. We found that screen-detected BC was more likely to be diagnosed at early stages than interval BC of luminal, luminal-HER2-positive, and triple-negative BC (TNBC) type, but not for the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2 positive) subtype. In addition, regular participation was related to a higher likelihood of screening detection than irregular participation for luminal, luminal-HER2-positive, and TNBC, but not for the HER2 positive subtype, either. Our results indicate that regular screening as compared to irregular screening is effective for all breast cancers except for the HER2 subtype. Abstract Background: Screening program effectiveness is generally evaluated for breast cancer (BC) as one disease and without considering the regularity of participation, while this might have an impact on detection rate. Objectives: To evaluate the short-term effectiveness of a mammography screening program for the major molecular subtypes of invasive BC. Methods: All women who participated in the screening program and were diagnosed with screen-detected or interval BC in Flanders were included in the study (2008–2018). Molecular subtypes considered were luminal and luminal-HER2-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, and triple-negative BC (TNBC). The relationship between the BC stage at diagnosis (early (I–II) versus advanced (III–IV)) and the method of detection (screen-detected or interval) and the relationship between the method of detection and participation regularity (regular versus irregular) were evaluated by multi-variable logistic regression models. All models were performed for each molecular subtype and adjusted for age. Results: Among the 12,318 included women, BC of luminal and luminal-HER2-positive subtypes accounted for 70.9% and 11.3%, respectively. Screen-detected BC was more likely to be diagnosed at early stages than interval BC with varied effect sizes for luminal, luminal-HER2-positive, and TNBC with OR:2.82 (95% CI: 2.45–3.25), OR:2.39 (95% CI: 1.77–3.24), and OR:2.29 (95% CI: 1.34–4.05), respectively. Regular participation was related to a higher likelihood of screening detection than irregular participation for luminal, luminal-HER2-positive, and TNBC with OR:1.21 (95% CI: 1.09–1.34), OR: 1.79 (95% CI: 1.38–2.33), and OR: 1.62 (95% CI: 1.10–2.41), respectively. Conclusions: Regular screening as compared to irregular screening is effective for all breast cancers except for the HER2 subtype.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lilu Ding
- Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands
- Department of Social Epidemiology and Health Policy, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, 2610 Antwerpen, Belgium
| | - Marcel J. W. Greuter
- Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands
- Department of Robotics and Mechatronics, University of Twente, 7522 NH Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Inge Truyen
- Belgian Cancer Registry, Rue Royale 215, 1210 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Mathijs Goossens
- Center for Cancer Detection (CvKO), Flanders, 8000 Bruges, Belgium
- Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 1090 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Bert Van der Vegt
- Department of Pathology & Medical Biology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Guido Van Hal
- Department of Social Epidemiology and Health Policy, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, 2610 Antwerpen, Belgium
- Center for Cancer Detection (CvKO), Flanders, 8000 Bruges, Belgium
| | - Geertruida H. de Bock
- Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Breast Cancer Screening Modalities, Recommendations, and Novel Imaging Techniques. Surg Clin North Am 2022; 103:63-82. [DOI: 10.1016/j.suc.2022.08.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
|
27
|
Yong-Hing CJ, Gordon PB, Appavoo S, Fitzgerald SR, Seely JM. Addressing Misinformation About the Canadian Breast Screening Guidelines. Can Assoc Radiol J 2022; 74:388-397. [PMID: 36048585 DOI: 10.1177/08465371221120798] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Screening mammography has been shown to reduce breast cancer mortality by 41% in screened women ages 40-69 years. There is misinformation about breast screening and the Canadian breast screening guidelines. This can decrease confidence in screening mammography and can lead to suboptimal recommendations. We review some of this misinformation to help radiologists and referring physicians navigate the varied international and provincial guidelines. We address the ages to start and stop breast screening. We explore how these recommendations may vary for specific populations such as patients who are at increased risk, transgender patients and minorities. We identify who would benefit from supplemental screening and review the available supplemental screening modalities including ultrasound, MRI, contrast-enhanced mammography and others. We describe emerging technologies including the potential use of artificial intelligence for breast screening. We provide background on why screening policies vary across the country between provinces and territories. This review is intended to help radiologists and referring physicians understand and navigate the varied international and provincial recommendations and guidelines and make the best recommendations for their patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte J Yong-Hing
- Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiology, 8166University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Paula B Gordon
- Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiology, 8166University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Shushiela Appavoo
- Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, 3158University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Sabrina R Fitzgerald
- Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiology, 7938University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Jean M Seely
- Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.,Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.,Ontario Breast Screening Program, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Lim YX, Lim ZL, Ho PJ, Li J. Breast Cancer in Asia: Incidence, Mortality, Early Detection, Mammography Programs, and Risk-Based Screening Initiatives. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:4218. [PMID: 36077752 PMCID: PMC9454998 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14174218] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2022] [Revised: 08/24/2022] [Accepted: 08/26/2022] [Indexed: 12/09/2022] Open
Abstract
Close to half (45.4%) of the 2.3 million breast cancers (BC) diagnosed in 2020 were from Asia. While the burden of breast cancer has been examined at the level of broad geographic regions, literature on more in-depth coverage of the individual countries and subregions of the Asian continent is lacking. This narrative review examines the breast cancer burden in 47 Asian countries. Breast cancer screening guidelines and risk-based screening initiatives are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yu Xian Lim
- Genome Institute of Singapore, Laboratory of Women’s Health & Genetics, Singapore 138672, Singapore
| | - Zi Lin Lim
- Genome Institute of Singapore, Laboratory of Women’s Health & Genetics, Singapore 138672, Singapore
| | - Peh Joo Ho
- Genome Institute of Singapore, Laboratory of Women’s Health & Genetics, Singapore 138672, Singapore
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117549, Singapore
| | - Jingmei Li
- Genome Institute of Singapore, Laboratory of Women’s Health & Genetics, Singapore 138672, Singapore
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117597, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Wilkinson AN, Billette JM, Ellison LF, Killip MA, Islam N, Seely JM. The Impact of Organised Screening Programs on Breast Cancer Stage at Diagnosis for Canadian Women Aged 40-49 and 50-59. Curr Oncol 2022; 29:5627-5643. [PMID: 36005182 PMCID: PMC9406663 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol29080444] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2022] [Revised: 07/28/2022] [Accepted: 08/03/2022] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
The relationship between Canadian mammography screening practices for women 40−49 and breast cancer (BC) stage at diagnosis in women 40−49 and 50−59 years was assessed using data from the Canadian Cancer Registry, provincial/territorial screening practices, and screening information from the Canadian Community Health Survey. For the 2010 to 2017 period, women aged 40−49 were diagnosed with lesser relative proportions of stage I BC (35.7 vs. 45.3%; p < 0.001), but greater proportions of stage II (42.6 vs. 36.7%, p < 0.001) and III (17.3 vs. 13.1%, p < 0.001) compared to women 50−59. Stage IV was lower among women 40−49 than 50−59 (4.4% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.005). Jurisdictions with organised screening programs for women 40−49 with annual recall (screeners) were compared with those without (comparators). Women aged 40−49 in comparator jurisdictions had higher proportions of stages II (43.7% vs. 40.7%, p < 0.001), III (18.3% vs. 15.6%, p < 0.001) and IV (4.6% vs. 3.9%, p = 0.001) compared to their peers in screener jurisdictions. Based on screening practices for women aged 40−49, women aged 50−59 had higher proportions of stages II (37.2% vs. 36.0%, p = 0.003) and III (13.6% vs. 12.3%, p < 0.001) in the comparator versus screener groups. The results of this study can be used to reassess the optimum lower age for BC screening in Canada.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna N. Wilkinson
- Department of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L6, Canada
| | - Jean-Michel Billette
- Centre for Population Health Data at Statistics Canada, Ottawa, ON K1A 0T6, Canada
| | - Larry F. Ellison
- Centre for Population Health Data at Statistics Canada, Ottawa, ON K1A 0T6, Canada
| | - Michael A. Killip
- School of Medicine, University of Limerick, V94 T9PX Limerick, Ireland
| | - Nayaar Islam
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L6, Canada
| | - Jean M. Seely
- Department of Radiology, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L6, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Eby PR, Ghate S, Hooley R. The Benefits of Early Detection: Evidence From Modern International Mammography Service Screening Programs. JOURNAL OF BREAST IMAGING 2022; 4:346-356. [PMID: 38416986 DOI: 10.1093/jbi/wbac041] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2022] [Indexed: 03/01/2024]
Abstract
Research from randomized controlled trials initiated up to 60 years ago consistently confirms that regular screening with mammography significantly reduces breast cancer mortality. Despite this success, there is ongoing debate regarding the efficacy of screening, which is confounded by technologic advances and concerns about cost, overdiagnosis, overtreatment, and equitable care of diverse patient populations. More recent screening research, designed to quell the debates, derives data from variable study designs, each with unique strengths and weaknesses. This article reviews observational population-based screening research that has followed the early initial long-term randomized controlled trials that are no longer practical or ethical to perform. The advantages and disadvantages of observational data and study design are outlined, including the three subtypes of population-based observational studies: cohort/case-control, trend, and incidence-based mortality/staging. The most recent research, typically performed in countries that administer screening mammography to women through centralized health service programs and directly track patient-specific outcomes and detection data, is summarized. These data are essential to understand and inform construction of effective new databases that facilitate continuous assessment of optimal screening techniques in the current era of rapidly developing medical technology, combined with a focus on health care that is both personal and equitable.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter R Eby
- Virginia Mason Medical Center, Department of Radiology, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Sujata Ghate
- Duke University School of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Regina Hooley
- Yale New Haven Hospital, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, New Haven, CT, USA
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Overdiagnosis of invasive breast cancer in population-based breast cancer screening: A short- and long-term perspective. Eur J Cancer 2022; 173:1-9. [PMID: 35839596 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2022.06.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2022] [Revised: 05/30/2022] [Accepted: 06/12/2022] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Overdiagnosis of invasive breast cancer (BC) is a contentious issue. OBJECTIVE The aim of this paper is to estimate the overdiagnosis rate of invasive BC in an organised BC screening program and to evaluate the impact of age and follow-up time. METHODS The micro-simulation model SiMRiSc was calibrated and validated for BC screening in Flanders, where women are screened biennially from age 50 to 69. Overdiagnosis rate was defined as the number of invasive BC that would not have been diagnosed in the absence of screening per 100,000 screened women during the screening period plus follow-up time (which was set at 5 years and varied from 2 to 15 years). Overdiagnosis rate was calculated overall and stratified by age. RESULTS The overall overdiagnosis rate for women screened biennially from 50 to 69 was 20.1 (95%CI: 16.9-23.2) per 100,000 women screened at 5-year follow-up from stopping screening. Overdiagnosis at 5-year follow-up time was 12.9 (95%CI: 4.6-21.1) and 74.2 (95%CI: 50.9-97.5) per 100,000 women screened for women who started screening at age 50 and 68, respectively. At 2- and 15-year follow-up time, overdiagnosis rate was 98.5 (95%CI: 75.8-121.3) and 13.4 (95%CI: 4.9-21.9), respectively, for women starting at age 50, and 297.0 (95%CI: 264.5-329.4) and 34.2 (95%CI: 17.5-50.8), respectively, for those starting at age 68. CONCLUSIONS Sufficient follow-up time (≥10 years) after screening stops is key to obtaining unbiased estimates of overdiagnosis. Overdiagnosis of invasive BC is a larger problem in older compared to younger women.
Collapse
|
32
|
Ding L, Greuter M, Truyen I, Goossens M, De Schutter H, de Bock G, Van Hal G. Irregular screening participation increases advanced stage breast cancer at diagnosis: A population-based study. Breast 2022; 65:61-66. [PMID: 35820298 PMCID: PMC9284440 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2022.07.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/18/2022] [Revised: 06/28/2022] [Accepted: 07/05/2022] [Indexed: 01/22/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effect of irregular screening behaviour on the risk of advanced stage breast cancer at diagnosis in Flanders. METHODS All women aged 50-69 who were invited to the organized breast cancer screening and diagnosed with breast cancer before age 72 from 2001 to 2018 were included. All prevalent screen and interval cancers within 2 years of a prevalent screen were excluded. Screening behaviour was categorized based on the number of invitations and performed screenings. Four groups were defined: regular, irregular, only-once, and never attenders. Advanced stage cancer was defined as a stage III + breast cancer. The association between screening regularity and breast cancer stage at diagnosis was evaluated in multivariable logistic regression models, taking age of diagnosis and socio-economic status into account. RESULTS In total 13.5% of the 38,005 breast cancer cases were diagnosed at the advanced stage. Compared to the regular attenders, the risk of advanced stage breast cancer for the irregular attenders, women who participated only-once, and never attenders was significantly higher with ORadjusted:1.17 (95%CI:1.06-1.29) and ORadjusted:2.18 (95%CI:1.94-2.45), and ORadjusted:5.95 (95%CI:5.33-6.65), respectively. CONCLUSIONS In our study, never attenders were nearly six times more likely to be diagnosed with advanced stage breast cancer than regular attenders, which was much higher than the estimates published thus far. An explanation for this is that the ever screened women is a heterogeneous group regarding the participation profiles which also includes irregular and only-once attenders. The benefit of regular screening should be informed to all women invited for screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L. Ding
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands,Department of Social Epidemiology and Health Policy, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - M.J.W. Greuter
- Department of Radiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands,Department of Robotics and Mechatronics, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - I. Truyen
- Belgian Cancer Registry, Brussels, Belgium
| | - M. Goossens
- Center for Cancer Detection (CvKO) in Flanders, Belgium,Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium
| | | | - G.H. de Bock
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands,Corresponding author.
| | - G. Van Hal
- Department of Social Epidemiology and Health Policy, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium,Center for Cancer Detection (CvKO) in Flanders, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Moger TA, Holen Å, Hanestad B, Hofvind S. Costs and Effects of Implementing Digital Tomosynthesis in a Population-Based Breast Cancer Screening Program: Predictions Using Results from the To-Be Trial in Norway. PHARMACOECONOMICS - OPEN 2022; 6:495-507. [PMID: 35796950 PMCID: PMC9283618 DOI: 10.1007/s41669-022-00343-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/16/2022] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although several studies from Europe and the US have shown promising screening results favoring digital breast tomosynthesis compared with standard digital mammography (DM), both costs and effects of implementing tomosynthesis in routine screening programs remain uncertain. The cost effectiveness of using tomosynthesis in routine screening is debated in the literature, and model inputs from randomized trials are lacking. Using parameters mainly from a randomized controlled trial (the To-Be trial), we simulated costs and effects of implementing tomosynthesis in the national screening program BreastScreen Norway. METHODS The To-Be trial was performed in Bergen from 2016 to 2017 within BreastScreen Norway, where females were randomized to either digital breast tomosynthesis including synthetic mammograms (DBT) or DM. The trial was followed by a cohort study offering all females DBT in 2018-2019. The trial included over 37,000 females, and allowed for estimation of short-term costs and effects related to screening, recall examinations and cancer detection. Using these and recent Norwegian estimates for 10-year stage-specific survival and treatment costs, the cost effectiveness of replacing DM with DBT in BreastScreen Norway was simulated in a decision tree model with probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Outcomes included false-positive screening results, screen-detected and interval cancers, stage at diagnosis, all-cause deaths, life-years gained, costs at recall and treatment and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULTS The estimated additional cost of DBT was €8.10. Simulating ten rounds of screening from 2018 and 10-year survival and costs, 500 deaths were averted and 2300 life-years gained at an additional screening cost of €29 million for females screened with DBT versus DM. Taking over-diagnosis, recall and treatment costs into account, DBT was dominant in the deterministic analysis. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio indicated cost savings of €1400 per life-year gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that DBT was cost effective in over 50% of the simulations at all willingness-to-pay levels per life-year gained, and in 80% of the simulations at levels above €22,000. If willingness-to-pay levels up to €35,000 were assumed, DBT would be cost effective in over 50% of the simulations for additional costs of DBT of up to €32, almost four times the estimated additional cost of €8.10. CONCLUSION DBT may be cost effective if implemented in BreastScreen Norway. However, generalizability of results could depend on factors varying between countries, such as recall rates, program sensitivity and specificity, treatment cost and willingness-to-pay levels.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tron Anders Moger
- Department of Health Management and Health Economics, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
| | - Åsne Holen
- Section for Breast Screening, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway
| | | | - Solveig Hofvind
- Section for Breast Screening, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Health and Care Sciences, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Luo C, Wang L, Zhang Y, Lu M, Lu B, Cai J, Chen H, Dai M. Advances in breast cancer screening modalities and status of global screening programs. Chronic Dis Transl Med 2022; 8:112-123. [PMID: 35774423 PMCID: PMC9215717 DOI: 10.1002/cdt3.21] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2021] [Accepted: 02/18/2022] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer (BC) is the most prevalent malignancy worldwide, and a continued upward trend has been predicted in the coming decades. Screening in selected targeted populations, which is effective in reducing cancer-related mortality, has been widely implemented in many countries. This review summarizes the advances in BC screening techniques, organized or opportunistic BC screening programs across different countries, and screening modalities recommended by different academic authorities. Mammography is the most widely used and effective technique for BC screening. Other complementary techniques include ultrasound, clinical breast examination, and magnetic resonance imaging. Novel screening tests, including digital breast tomosynthesis and liquid biopsies, are still under development. Globally, the implementation status of BC screening programs is uneven, which is reflected by differences in screening modes, techniques, and population coverage. The recommended optimal screening strategies varied according to the authoritative guidelines. The effectiveness of current screening programs is influenced by several factors, including low detection rate, high false-positive rate, and unsatisfactory coverage and uptake rates. Exploration of accurate BC risk prediction models and the development of risk-stratified screening strategies are highly warranted in future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chenyu Luo
- Medical Research Center, Peking Union Medical College HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Le Wang
- Department of Cancer PreventionCancer Hospital of the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Zhejiang Cancer Hospital)HangzhouZhejiangChina
| | - Yuhan Zhang
- Medical Research Center, Peking Union Medical College HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Ming Lu
- Medical Research Center, Peking Union Medical College HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Bin Lu
- Medical Research Center, Peking Union Medical College HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Jie Cai
- Department of General Surgery, Peking Union Medical College HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Hongda Chen
- Medical Research Center, Peking Union Medical College HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Min Dai
- Medical Research Center, Peking Union Medical College HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Appavoo S. How Did CNBSS Influence Guidelines for So Long and What Can That Teach Us? Curr Oncol 2022; 29:3922-3932. [PMID: 35735422 PMCID: PMC9221595 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol29060313] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/27/2022] [Revised: 05/23/2022] [Accepted: 05/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
The biased randomization and other quality concerns about the Canadian National Breast Screening Studies (CNBSS) were documented and criticized for decades, even by several individuals very close to the research. CNBSS were the outlier studies among several RCTs of the era and yet were given equal weighting and occasionally higher importance than the remainder of the canon of mammography RCTs. These studies have had an ongoing influence on subsequent evidence review, guideline formation, and, ultimately, patient access to screening. This article explores possible reasons for the ongoing inclusion of CNBSS in the body of mammography screening evidence, discusses the lack of expertise in critical healthcare guideline processes, and, ultimately, suggests several actions and reforms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shushiela Appavoo
- Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, University of Alberta, 2A2.41 WMC 8440-112 Street, Edmonton, Alberta, AB T6G 2B7, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Overdetection of Breast Cancer. Curr Oncol 2022; 29:3894-3910. [PMID: 35735420 PMCID: PMC9222123 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol29060311] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2022] [Revised: 05/16/2022] [Accepted: 05/17/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Overdetection (often referred to as overdiagnosis) of cancer is the detection of disease, such as through a screening program, that would otherwise remain occult through an individual’s life. In the context of screening, this could occur for cancers that were slow growing or indolent, or simply because an unscreened individual would have died from some other cause before the cancer had surfaced clinically. The main harm associated with overdetection is the subsequent overdiagnosis and overtreatment of disease. In this article, the phenomenon is reviewed, the methods of estimation of overdetection are discussed and reasons for variability in such estimates are given, with emphasis on an analysis using Canadian data. Microsimulation modeling is used to illustrate the expected time course of cancer detection that gives rise to overdetection. While overdetection exists, the actual amount is likely to be much lower than the estimate used by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. Furthermore, the issue is of greater significance in older rather than younger women due to competing causes of death. The particular challenge associated with in situ breast cancer is considered and possible approaches to avoiding overtreatment are suggested.
Collapse
|
37
|
Kempt H, Nagel SK. Responsibility, second opinions and peer-disagreement: ethical and epistemological challenges of using AI in clinical diagnostic contexts. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2022; 48:222-229. [PMID: 34907006 DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2021-107440] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2021] [Accepted: 11/29/2021] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
In this paper, we first classify different types of second opinions and evaluate the ethical and epistemological implications of providing those in a clinical context. Second, we discuss the issue of how artificial intelligent (AI) could replace the human cognitive labour of providing such second opinion and find that several AI reach the levels of accuracy and efficiency needed to clarify their use an urgent ethical issue. Third, we outline the normative conditions of how AI may be used as second opinion in clinical processes, weighing the benefits of its efficiency against concerns of responsibility attribution. Fourth, we provide a 'rule of disagreement' that fulfils these conditions while retaining some of the benefits of expanding the use of AI-based decision support systems (AI-DSS) in clinical contexts. This is because the rule of disagreement proposes to use AI as much as possible, but retain the ability to use human second opinions to resolve disagreements between AI and physician-in-charge. Fifth, we discuss some counterarguments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hendrik Kempt
- Applied Ethics Group, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
| | - Saskia K Nagel
- Applied Ethics Group, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Grimm LJ, Avery CS, Hendrick E, Baker JA. Benefits and Risks of Mammography Screening in Women Ages 40 to 49 Years. J Prim Care Community Health 2022; 13:21501327211058322. [PMID: 35068237 PMCID: PMC8796062 DOI: 10.1177/21501327211058322] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer screening in the United States is complicated by conflicting recommendations from professional and governmental organizations. The benefits and risks of breast cancer screening differ though by age which should influence shared decision-making discussions. Compared to older women, women ages 40 to 49 years have a lower risk of breast cancer, but the types of breast cancer that develop are often more aggressive with a poorer prognosis. Furthermore, younger women have a longer life expectancy and fewer comorbidities. The primary benefits of screening for women in their 40s are a reduction in breast cancer mortality, years of life lost to breast cancer, and morbidity of breast cancer treatment by detecting cancers at an earlier stage. Compared to older women, the risks of breast cancer screening in women ages 40 to 49 years includes more false positive recalls and biopsies as well as transient anxiety. Concerns regarding radiation induced malignancy and overdiagnosis are minimal in this age group. The shorter lead time of breast cancer in women ages 40 to 49 years also favors shorter screening intervals. This information should help inform providers in their shared decision-making discussions with patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Jay A Baker
- Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Tsuruda KM, Veierød MB, Houssami N, Waade GG, Mangerud G, Hofvind S. Women's conceptual knowledge about breast cancer screening and overdiagnosis in Norway: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 2021; 11:e052121. [PMID: 34907059 PMCID: PMC8671979 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052121] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To investigate conceptual knowledge about mammographic screening among Norwegian women. DESIGN We administered a cross-sectional, web-based survey. We used multiple-choice questions and a grading rubric published by a research group from Australia. SETTING Our Norwegian-language survey was open from April to June 2020 and targeted women aged 45-74 years. PARTICIPANTS 2033 women completed our questionnaire. We excluded 13 women outside the target age range and 128 women with incomplete data. Responses from 1892 women were included in the final study sample. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES The questionnaire focused on women's knowledge about the breast cancer mortality reduction, false positive results and overdiagnosis associated with mammographic screening. The primary outcome was the mean number of marks assigned in each of the three themes and overall. There were three potential marks for questions about breast cancer mortality, one for false positives and six for overdiagnosis. RESULTS Most women (91.7%) correctly reported that screened women are less likely to die of breast cancer than non-screened women. 39.7% of women reported having heard of a 'false positive screening result' and 86.2% identified the term's definition; 51.3% of women had heard of 'overdiagnosis' and 14.8% identified the term's definition. The mean score was 2.59 of 3 for questions about breast cancer mortality benefit and 0.93 of 1 for the question about false positive screening results. It was 2.23 of 6 for questions about overdiagnosis. CONCLUSIONS Most participants correctly answered questions about the breast cancer mortality benefit and false positive results associated with screening. The proportion of correct responses to questions about overdiagnosis was modest, indicating that conceptual knowledge about overdiagnosis was lower. Qualitative studies that can obtain in-depth information about women's understanding of overdiagnosis may help improve Norwegian-language information about this challenging topic.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kaitlyn M Tsuruda
- Department of Breast Cancer Screening, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Biostatistics, Oslo Centre for Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Marit B Veierød
- Department of Biostatistics, Oslo Centre for Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Nehmat Houssami
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Gunvor G Waade
- Department of Health Sciences, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway
| | - Gunhild Mangerud
- Department of Breast Cancer Screening, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway
| | - Solveig Hofvind
- Department of Breast Cancer Screening, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Health and Care Sciences, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Rahman WT, Helvie MA. Breast cancer screening in average and high-risk women. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2021; 83:3-14. [PMID: 34903436 DOI: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2021.11.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2021] [Revised: 11/03/2021] [Accepted: 11/04/2021] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most common cancer among females worldwide with rising incidence. In the United States, screening mammography and advances in therapy have lowered mortality by 41% since 1990. Screening mammography is supported by randomized control trials (RCT), observational studies, and computer model data. Digital breast tomosynthesis is a new technology that addresses limitations in mammography resulting from overlapping breast tissue, improving its sensitivity and specificity. Patients at high risk for breast cancer include those with a ≥20% lifetime risk, high-risk germline mutation, or history of thoracic radiation treatment between 10-30 years of age. Such patients are recommended to undergo annual screening mammography and adjunctive annual screening breast MRI. Patients unable to undergo MRI may undergo whole breast ultrasound or contrast-enhanced mammography. Pregnant and lactating patients at average risk for breast cancer are recommended to undergo age-appropriate screening mammography.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W Tania Rahman
- Department of Radiology, Division of Breast Imaging, 1500 E. Medical Center Dr., Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA.
| | - Mark A Helvie
- Department of Radiology, Division of Breast Imaging, 1500 E. Medical Center Dr., Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Identification of women at risk of hereditary breast-ovarian cancer among participants in a population-based breast cancer screening. Fam Cancer 2021; 21:309-318. [PMID: 34669096 DOI: 10.1007/s10689-021-00281-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/03/2020] [Accepted: 10/13/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
Women attending mammography screening may benefit from family history (FH) assessment for the identification of Hereditary Breast Ovarian Cancer (HBOC). Few studies explored the efficacy of tailored educational interventions in driving the attention on FH-associated risk among these women. To compare the efficacy of two educational tools in increasing attention towards FH, 6.802 women with a negative mammography were randomized to receive a note on FH of breast/ovarian cancer (letter A, n = 3.402) or a note with details on possible implication of FH patterns (letter B, n = 3.200). Upon women's request, a brief questionnaire was administered on phone at the Screening Unit (S.U.) to select those eligible for an in-depth FH evaluation at the Genetic Unit (G.U.). Each affected relative was scored 1-3 according to type of cancer, age at diagnosis, gender, position in the family tree. In all, 401 women contacted the S.U.: 244 (6.6%) in group A and 177 (5.2%) in group B (adjOR 1.27; 95%CI 1.03-1.56). FH scored ≥ 3 for 164 women: 177 (47.5%) in group B and 224 (35.7%) in group A, (adjOR 1.59, 95%CI 1.06-2.38). The G.U. traced and interviewed 148 women, 65 (43.9%) were offered an in-person consultation: 38 attended and 30 were eligible for testing. A test was performed for 24 women: no BRCA pathogenic variant was found. Among mammographic screening attendees, educational material with a simple description of FH may improve self-referral of women deserving an in-depth evaluation for HBOC identification. Additional educational efforts are needed to enhance the efficiency of the intervention.
Collapse
|
42
|
Moshina N, Falk RS, Hofvind S. Long-term quality of life among breast cancer survivors eligible for screening at diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Public Health 2021; 199:65-76. [PMID: 34560477 DOI: 10.1016/j.puhe.2021.08.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2021] [Revised: 08/07/2021] [Accepted: 08/15/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES This study aimed to explore the long-term quality of life (QoL) among breast cancer survivors eligible for mammographic screening at diagnosis and compare that to QoL among women with no history of breast cancer. STUDY DESIGN Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS A systematic review of randomised controlled trials and observational studies published between January 2000 and July 2019 was performed. Eight studies were included in the review. Six studies with QoL measurement scales (0-100) were included in the meta-analysis. We used fixed and random effects models to obtain Cohen's d with 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity among studies was evaluated by the I2 statistics. RESULTS Information about 6145 breast cancer survivors diagnosed between 1995 and 2012 and followed for >1-10 years was analysed. Four studies used SF-36/RAND-36, three studies used EORTC QLQ-C30, one study used FACT-G and one study used FACT-B. The mean score of QoL for breast cancer survivors varied from 63.0 (RAND SF-36, 0-100) to 110.5 (FACT-B, 0-123). Two studies showed better, three studies showed similar and two studies showed poorer mean scores for breast cancer survivors compared with women with no history of breast cancer. The meta-analysis showed no significant differences in QoL for breast cancer survivors compared with women with no history of breast cancer (Cohen's d = -0.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.14 to 0.00 and I2 = 83.7% for the fixed effect model; Cohen's d = -0.00, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.17 and I2 = 82.4% for the random effects model). CONCLUSION QoL did not differ between breast cancer survivors eligible for mammographic screening at diagnosis and followed for >1-10 years and women with no history of breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N Moshina
- Cancer Registry of Norway, Section of Cancer Screening, P.O. 5313, Majorstuen, Oslo, 0304, Norway.
| | - R S Falk
- Oslo University Hospital, Oslo Centre for Biostatistics and Epidemiology, P.O. 4950, Nydalen, Oslo, 0424, Norway.
| | - S Hofvind
- Cancer Registry of Norway, Section of Cancer Screening, P.O. 5313, Majorstuen, Oslo, 0304, Norway; Department of Health and Care Sciences, UiT The Artic University of Norway, P.O. 6050, Tromsø, 9037, Norway.
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Ward ZJ, Atun R, Hricak H, Asante K, McGinty G, Sutton EJ, Norton L, Scott AM, Shulman LN. The impact of scaling up access to treatment and imaging modalities on global disparities in breast cancer survival: a simulation-based analysis. Lancet Oncol 2021; 22:1301-1311. [PMID: 34416159 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(21)00403-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2021] [Revised: 06/21/2021] [Accepted: 06/30/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Female breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in the world, with wide variations in reported survival by country. Women in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) in particular face several barriers to breast cancer services, including diagnostics and treatment. We aimed to estimate the potential impact of scaling up the availability of treatment and imaging modalities on breast cancer survival globally, together with improvements in quality of care. METHODS For this simulation-based analysis, we used a microsimulation model of global cancer survival, which accounts for the availability and stage-specific survival impact of specific treatment modalities (chemotherapy, radiotherapy, surgery, and targeted therapy), imaging modalities (ultrasound, x-ray, CT, MRI, PET, and single-photon emission computed tomography [SPECT]), and quality of cancer care, to simulate 5-year net survival for women with newly diagnosed breast cancer in 200 countries and territories in 2018. We calibrated the model to empirical data on 5-year net breast cancer survival in 2010-14 from CONCORD-3. We evaluated the potential impact of scaling up specific imaging and treatment modalities and quality of care to the mean level of high-income countries, individually and in combination. We ran 1000 simulations for each policy intervention and report the means and 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) for all model outcomes. FINDINGS We estimate that global 5-year net survival for women diagnosed with breast cancer in 2018 was 67·9% (95% UI 62·9-73·4) overall, with an almost 25-times difference between low-income (3·5% [0·4-10·0]) and high-income (87·0% [85·6-88·4]) countries. Among individual treatment modalities, scaling up access to surgery alone was estimated to yield the largest survival gains globally (2·7% [95% UI 0·4-8·3]), and scaling up CT alone would have the largest global impact among imaging modalities (0·5% [0·0-2·0]). Scaling up a package of traditional modalities (surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, ultrasound, and x-ray) could improve global 5-year net survival to 75·6% (95% UI 70·6-79·4), with survival in low-income countries improving from 3·5% (0·4-10·0) to 28·6% (4·9-60·1). Adding concurrent improvements in quality of care could further improve global 5-year net survival to 78·2% (95% UI 74·9-80·4), with a substantial impact in low-income countries, improving net survival to 55·3% (42·2-67·8). Comprehensive scale-up of access to all modalities and improvements in quality of care could improve global 5-year net survival to 82·3% (95% UI 79·3-85·0). INTERPRETATION Comprehensive scale-up of treatment and imaging modalities, and improvements in quality of care could improve global 5-year net breast cancer survival by nearly 15 percentage points. Scale-up of traditional modalities and quality-of-care improvements could achieve 70% of these total potential gains, with substantial impact in LMICs, providing a more feasible pathway to improving breast cancer survival in these settings even without the benefits of future investments in targeted therapy and advanced imaging. FUNDING Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health, and National Cancer Institute P30 Cancer Center Support Grant to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zachary J Ward
- Center for Health Decision Science, Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA.
| | - Rifat Atun
- Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Hedvig Hricak
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Kwanele Asante
- African Organisation for Research and Training in Cancer, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Geraldine McGinty
- Departments of Radiology and Population Science, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | - Elizabeth J Sutton
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Larry Norton
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Andrew M Scott
- Olivia Newton-John Cancer Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Department of Molecular Imaging and Therapy, Austin Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; School of Cancer Medicine, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Lawrence N Shulman
- Department of Medicine, Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Hofvind S, Knutsvik G, Holen ÅS, Tsuruda KM, Akslen LA. Detection and significance of small and low proliferation breast cancer. J Med Screen 2021; 29:32-37. [PMID: 34157879 DOI: 10.1177/09691413211023970] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To determine the frequency and discuss possible implications of early breast cancer with particularly good prognosis and defined by tumor diameter and cell proliferation. SETTING Detection of small and slowly growing tumors presents a challenge in breast cancer management, due to the risk of over-treatment. Here, we attempted to define a group of such tumors by combining small diameter (≤10 mm, T1ab tumors) with low tumor cell proliferation (≤10% Ki67 expression rate). These tumors were termed small low proliferation cancers (SLPC). METHODS Two population-based cohorts were studied: a small research series (n = 534), and a nation-wide registry-based series of prospectively collected routine data (n = 8433). In the latter, we stratified by detection mode; screen-detected, interval, and breast cancers detected outside of screening. Patients were treated according to national guidelines at time of their diagnosis. For both cohorts, we compared tumor histopathology and risk of breast cancer death using a log-rank test for cases with SLPC versus non-SLPC. RESULTS In the research series (median follow-up 151 months), the frequency of SLPC was 10% (54/534), with one breast cancer death compared with 78 among the remaining 480 cases of non-SLPC (p = 0.008). In the registry series (median follow-up 42 months), the frequency of SLPC was 10% (854/8433), with five deaths compared to 187 among the remaining 7579 cases (p = 0.0004). CONCLUSIONS SLPC was associated with very low risk of breast cancer death. Prospective randomized trials are needed to clarify whether less aggressive treatment could be a safe option for women with such early breast cancers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Solveig Hofvind
- Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway.,Department of Life Sciences and Health, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway
| | - Gøril Knutsvik
- Centre for Cancer Biomarkers CCBIO, Department of Clinical Medicine, Section for Pathology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.,Department of Pathology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | | | - Kaitlyn M Tsuruda
- Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway.,Department of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Lars A Akslen
- Centre for Cancer Biomarkers CCBIO, Department of Clinical Medicine, Section for Pathology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.,Department of Pathology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Monticciolo DL, Malak SF, Friedewald SM, Eby PR, Newell MS, Moy L, Destounis S, Leung JWT, Hendrick RE, Smetherman D. Breast Cancer Screening Recommendations Inclusive of All Women at Average Risk: Update from the ACR and Society of Breast Imaging. J Am Coll Radiol 2021; 18:1280-1288. [PMID: 34154984 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2021.04.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 99] [Impact Index Per Article: 33.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2021] [Accepted: 04/27/2021] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
Breast cancer remains the most common nonskin cancer, the second leading cause of cancer deaths, and the leading cause of premature death in US women. Mammography screening has been proven effective in reducing breast cancer deaths in women age 40 years and older. A mortality reduction of 40% is possible with regular screening. Treatment advances cannot overcome the disadvantage of being diagnosed with an advanced-stage tumor. The ACR and Society of Breast Imaging recommend annual mammography screening beginning at age 40, which provides the greatest mortality reduction, diagnosis at earlier stage, better surgical options, and more effective chemotherapy. Annual screening results in more screening-detected tumors, tumors of smaller sizes, and fewer interval cancers than longer screening intervals. Screened women in their 40s are more likely to have early-stage disease, negative lymph nodes, and smaller tumors than unscreened women. Delaying screening until age 45 or 50 will result in an unnecessary loss of life to breast cancer and adversely affects minority women in particular. Screening should continue past age 74 years, without an upper age limit unless severe comorbidities limit life expectancy. Benefits of screening should be considered along with the possibilities of recall for additional imaging and benign biopsy and the less tangible risks of anxiety and overdiagnosis. Although recall and biopsy recommendations are higher with more frequent screening, so are life-years gained and breast cancer deaths averted. Women who wish to maximize benefit will choose annual screening starting at age 40 years and will not stop screening prematurely.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Debra L Monticciolo
- Vice-chair for Research, Department of Radiology, and Section Chief, Breast Imaging, Texas A&M University Health Sciences, Baylor Scott & White Healthcare-Central Texas, Temple, Texas.
| | | | - Sarah M Friedewald
- Chief of Breast and Women's Imaging; Vice Chair of Operations, Department of Radiology; Medical Director, Lynn Sage Comprehensive Breast Center, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Peter R Eby
- Chief of Breast Imaging, Radiology Representative to the Cancer Committee, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Mary S Newell
- Associate Division Director; Associate Director of Breast Center, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Linda Moy
- Laura and Isaac Perlutter Cancer Center, NYU School of Medicine, New York City, New York
| | - Stamatia Destounis
- Chair of Clinical Research and Medical Outcomes Department, Elizabeth Wende Breast Care, Rochester, New York
| | - Jessica W T Leung
- Deputy Chair of Department of Breast Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - R Edward Hendrick
- Department of Radiology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado
| | - Dana Smetherman
- Department Chair and Associate Medical Director of the Medical Specialties, Department of Radiology, Ochsner Medical Center, New Orleans, Louisiana
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
[Connected bras for breast cancer detection in 2021: Analysis and perspectives]. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2021; 49:907-912. [PMID: 34091080 DOI: 10.1016/j.gofs.2021.05.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/04/2021] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Breast cancer is the leading cancer in women worldwide with about 2 million new cases and 685,000 deaths each year. Mammography is the most widely used screening and diagnostic method. Currently, digital technologies advances facilitate the development of connected and portable devices. To overcome some of the disadvantages of mammography (breast compression, difficulty in analyzing dense breasts, radiation, limited accessibility in some countries, etc.), portable devices, conventionally known as connected bras (CB), have been created to offer an alternative method to mammography. The objective of our review was to list all the published CBs in order to know their main characteristics, their potential indications and their possible limitations. METHOD A bibliographical search in the PUBMED database selecting only articles written in French or English, between 2011 and 2020, found 7 CBs under development. RESULTS These CBs use thermal, ultrasonic and impedance sensors. Their advantages are an absence of irradiation, an absence of breast compression and a flexibility of use (outside an X-ray cabinet). Mammary gland analysis times vary, depending on the device, between 30min and 24h. They are all connected to data transmission systems and models that analyze the results. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION These CBs are mostly still undergoing clinical validation (only [iTBra] has been evaluated in a clinical trial) and require evaluation steps that will eventually allow their future use for breast cancer detection in high-risk women, particularly in women with dense breasts and in women between screening waves.
Collapse
|
47
|
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, Bray F. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021; 71:209-249. [PMID: 33538338 DOI: 10.3322/caac.21660] [Citation(s) in RCA: 53379] [Impact Index Per Article: 17793.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/07/2020] [Accepted: 12/15/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
This article provides an update on the global cancer burden using the GLOBOCAN 2020 estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Worldwide, an estimated 19.3 million new cancer cases (18.1 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and almost 10.0 million cancer deaths (9.9 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) occurred in 2020. Female breast cancer has surpassed lung cancer as the most commonly diagnosed cancer, with an estimated 2.3 million new cases (11.7%), followed by lung (11.4%), colorectal (10.0 %), prostate (7.3%), and stomach (5.6%) cancers. Lung cancer remained the leading cause of cancer death, with an estimated 1.8 million deaths (18%), followed by colorectal (9.4%), liver (8.3%), stomach (7.7%), and female breast (6.9%) cancers. Overall incidence was from 2-fold to 3-fold higher in transitioned versus transitioning countries for both sexes, whereas mortality varied <2-fold for men and little for women. Death rates for female breast and cervical cancers, however, were considerably higher in transitioning versus transitioned countries (15.0 vs 12.8 per 100,000 and 12.4 vs 5.2 per 100,000, respectively). The global cancer burden is expected to be 28.4 million cases in 2040, a 47% rise from 2020, with a larger increase in transitioning (64% to 95%) versus transitioned (32% to 56%) countries due to demographic changes, although this may be further exacerbated by increasing risk factors associated with globalization and a growing economy. Efforts to build a sustainable infrastructure for the dissemination of cancer prevention measures and provision of cancer care in transitioning countries is critical for global cancer control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hyuna Sung
- Surveillance and Health Equity Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Jacques Ferlay
- Section of Cancer Surveillance, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
| | - Rebecca L Siegel
- Surveillance and Health Equity Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Mathieu Laversanne
- Section of Cancer Surveillance, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
| | - Isabelle Soerjomataram
- Section of Cancer Surveillance, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
| | - Ahmedin Jemal
- Surveillance and Health Equity Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Freddie Bray
- Section of Cancer Surveillance, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Bulliard JL, Beau AB, Njor S, Wu WYY, Procopio P, Nickson C, Lynge E. Breast cancer screening and overdiagnosis. Int J Cancer 2021; 149:846-853. [PMID: 33872390 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.33602] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2020] [Revised: 03/19/2021] [Accepted: 04/07/2021] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
Overdiagnosis is a harmful consequence of screening which is particularly challenging to estimate. An unbiased setting to measure overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening requires comparative data from a screened and an unscreened cohort for at least 30 years. Such randomised data will not become available, leaving us with observational data over shorter time periods and outcomes of modelling. This collaborative effort of the International Cancer Screening Network quantified the variation in estimated breast cancer overdiagnosis in organised programmes with evaluation of both observed and simulated data, and presented examples of how modelling can provide additional insights. Reliable observational data, analysed with study design accounting for methodological pitfalls, and modelling studies with different approaches, indicate that overdiagnosis accounts for less than 10% of invasive breast cancer cases in a screening target population of women aged 50 to 69. Estimates above this level are likely to derive from inaccuracies in study design. The widely discrepant estimates of overdiagnosis reported from observational data could substantially be reduced by use of a cohort study design with at least 10 years of follow-up after screening stops. In contexts where concomitant opportunistic screening or gradual implementation of screening occurs, and data on valid comparison groups are not readily available, modelling of screening intervention becomes an advantageous option to obtain reliable estimates of breast cancer overdiagnosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jean-Luc Bulliard
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health (unisanté), University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Anna-Belle Beau
- Pharmacologie Médicale, Faculté de Médecine, Université Paul-Sabatier III, CHU Toulouse, UMR INSERM, Toulouse, France
| | - Sisse Njor
- Randers Regional Hospital, Randers, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Wendy Yi-Ying Wu
- Department of Radiation Sciences, Oncology, Umeå University, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
| | - Pietro Procopio
- Daffodil Centre, University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
- Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Carlton, Australia
| | - Carolyn Nickson
- Daffodil Centre, University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
- Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Carlton, Australia
| | - Elsebeth Lynge
- Nykøbing Falster Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Nykøbing Falster, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Heller SL, Plaunova A, Gao Y. Ductal Carcinoma In Situ and Progression to Invasive Cancer: A Review of the Evidence. JOURNAL OF BREAST IMAGING 2021; 3:135-143. [PMID: 38424826 DOI: 10.1093/jbi/wbaa119] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/04/2020] [Indexed: 03/02/2024]
Abstract
Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), breast cancer confined to the milk ducts, is a heterogeneous entity. The question of how and when a case of DCIS will extend beyond the ducts to become invasive breast cancer has implications for both patient prognosis and optimal treatment approaches. The natural history of DCIS has been explored through a variety of methods, from mouse models to biopsy specimen reviews to population-based screening data to modeling studies. This article will review the available evidence regarding progression pathways and will also summarize current trials designed to assess DCIS progression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samantha L Heller
- NYU Grossman School of Medicine, Department of Radiology, New York, NY
| | | | - Yiming Gao
- NYU Grossman School of Medicine, Department of Radiology, New York, NY
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Canelo-Aybar C, Ferreira DS, Ballesteros M, Posso M, Montero N, Solà I, Saz-Parkinson Z, Lerda D, Rossi PG, Duffy SW, Follmann M, Gräwingholt A, Alonso-Coello P. Benefits and harms of breast cancer mammography screening for women at average risk of breast cancer: A systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer. J Med Screen 2021; 28:389-404. [PMID: 33632023 DOI: 10.1177/0969141321993866] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Mammography screening is generally accepted in women aged 50-69, but the balance between benefits and harms remains controversial in other age groups. This study systematically reviews these effects to inform the European Breast Cancer Guidelines. METHODS We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) or systematic reviews of observational studies in the absence of RCTs comparing invitation to mammography screening to no invitation in women at average breast cancer (BC) risk. We extracted data for mortality, BC stage, mastectomy rate, chemotherapy provision, overdiagnosis and false-positive-related adverse effects. We performed a pooled analysis of relative risks, applying an inverse-variance random-effects model for three age groups (<50, 50-69 and 70-74). GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) was used to assess the certainty of evidence. RESULTS We identified 10 RCTs including 616,641 women aged 38-75. Mammography reduced BC mortality in women aged 50-69 (relative risk (RR) 0.77, 95%CI (confidence interval) 0.66-0.90, high certainty) and 70-74 (RR 0.77, 95%CI 0.54-1.09, high certainty), with smaller reductions in under 50s (RR 0.88, 95%CI 0.76-1.02, moderate certainty). Mammography reduced stage IIA+ in women 50-69 (RR 0.80, 95%CI 0.64-1.00, very low certainty) but resulted in an overdiagnosis probability of 23% (95%CI 18-27%) and 17% (95%CI 15-20%) in under 50s and 50-69, respectively (moderate certainty). Mammography was associated with 2.9% increased risk of invasive procedures with benign outcomes (low certainty). CONCLUSIONS For women 50-69, high certainty evidence that mammography screening reduces BC mortality risk would support policymakers formulating strong recommendations. In other age groups, where the net balance of effects is less clear, conditional recommendations will be more likely, together with shared decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carlos Canelo-Aybar
- CIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain.,Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Public Health, Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Diogenes S Ferreira
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Public Health, Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain.,Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Mónica Ballesteros
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Public Health, Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Margarita Posso
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Public Health, Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain.,Department of Epidemiology and Evaluation, IMIM (Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Nadia Montero
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Public Health, Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Ivan Solà
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Public Health, Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Donata Lerda
- European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Ispra, VA, Italy
| | - Paolo G Rossi
- Epidemiology Unit, AUSL - IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, RE, Italy
| | - Stephen W Duffy
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | | | | | - Pablo Alonso-Coello
- CIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain.,Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Public Health, Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|