Observed and Predicted Risk of Breast Cancer Death in Randomized Trials on Breast Cancer Screening

Mammography screening: A major issue in medicine

Breast cancer mortality is declining in most high-income countries. The role of mammography screening in these declines is much debated. Screening impacts cancer mortality through decreasing the incidence of number of advanced cancers with poor prognosis, while therapies and patient management impact cancer mortality through decreasing the fatality of cancers. The effectiveness of cancer screening is the ability of a screening method to curb the incidence of advanced cancers in populations. Methods for evaluating cancer screening effectiveness are based on the monitoring of age-adjusted incidence rates of advanced cancers that should decrease after the introduction of screening. Likewise, cancer-specific mortality rates should decline more rapidly in areas with screening than in areas without or with lower levels of screening but where patient management is similar. These two criteria have provided evidence that screening for colorectal and cervical cancer contributes to decreasing the mortality associated with these two cancers. In contrast, screening for neuroblastoma in children was discontinued in the early 2000s because these two criteria were not met. In addition, overdiagnosis - i.e. the detection of non-progressing occult neuroblastoma that would not have been life-threatening during the subject's lifetime - is a major undesirable consequence of screening. Accumulating epidemiological data show that in populations where mammography screening has been widespread for a long time, there has been no or only a modest decline in the incidence of advanced cancers, including that of de novo metastatic (stage IV) cancers at diagnosis. Moreover, breast cancer mortality reductions are similar in areas with early introduction and high penetration of screening and in areas with late introduction and low penetration of screening. Overdiagnosis is commonplace, representing 20% or more of all breast cancers among women invited to screening and 30-50% of screen-detected cancers. Overdiagnosis leads to overtreatment and inflicts considerable physical, psychological and economic harm on many women. Overdiagnosis has also exerted considerable disruptive effects on the interpretation of clinical outcomes expressed in percentages (instead of rates) or as overall survival (instead of mortality rates or stage-specific survival). Rates of radical mastectomies have not decreased following the introduction of screening and keep rising in some countries (e.g. the United States of America (USA)). Hence, the epidemiological picture of mammography screening closely resembles that of screening for neuroblastoma. Reappraisals of Swedish mammography trials demonstrate that the design and statistical analysis of these trials were different from those of all trials on screening for cancers other than breast cancer. We found compelling indications that these trials overestimated reductions in breast cancer mortality associated with screening, in part because of the statistical analyses themselves, in part because of improved therapies and underreporting of breast cancer as the underlying cause of death in screening groups. In this regard, Swedish trials should publish the stage-specific breast cancer mortality rates for the screening and control groups separately. Results of the Greater New York Health Insurance Plan trial are biased because of the underreporting of breast cancer cases and deaths that occurred in women who did not participate in screening. After 17 years of follow-up, the United Kingdom (UK) Age Trial showed no benefit from mammography screening starting at age 39-41. Until around 2005, most proponents of breast screening backed the monitoring of changes in advanced cancer incidence and comparative studies on breast cancer mortality for the evaluation of breast screening effectiveness. However, in an attempt to mitigate the contradictions between results of mammography trials and population data, breast-screening proponents have elected to change the criteria for the evaluation of cancer screening effectiveness, giving precedence to incidence-based mortality (IBM) and case-control studies. But practically all IBM studies on mammography screening have a strong ecological component in their design. The two IBM studies done in Norway that meet all methodological requirements do not document significant reductions in breast cancer mortality associated with mammography screening. Because of their propensity to exaggerate the health benefits of screening, case-control studies may demonstrate that mammography screening could reduce the risk of death from diseases other than breast cancer. Numerous statistical model approaches have been conducted for estimating the contributions of screening and of patient management to reductions in breast cancer mortality. Unverified assumptions are needed for running these models. For instance, many models assume that if screening had not occurred, the majority of screen-detected asymptomatic cancers would have progressed to symptomatic advanced cancers. This assumption is not grounded in evidence because a large proportion of screen-detected breast cancers represent overdiagnosis and hence non-progressing tumours. The accumulation of population data in well-screened populations diminishes the relevance of model approaches. The comparison of the performance of different screening modalities - e.g. mammography, digital mammography, ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), three-dimensional tomosynthesis (TDT) - concentrates on detection rates, which is the ability of a technique to detect more cancers than other techniques. However, a greater detection rate tells little about the capacity to prevent interval and advanced cancers and could just reflect additional overdiagnosis. Studies based on the incidence of advanced cancers and on the evaluation of overdiagnosis should be conducted before marketing new breast-imaging technologies. Women at high risk of breast cancer (i.e. 30% lifetime risk and more), such as women with BRCA1/2 mutations, require a close breast surveillance. MRI is the preferred imaging method until more radical risk-reduction options are eventually adopted. For women with an intermediate risk of breast cancer (i.e. 10-29% lifetime risk), including women with extremely dense breast at mammography, there is no evidence that more frequent mammography screening or screening with other modalities actually reduces the risk of breast cancer death. A plethora of epidemiological data shows that, since 1985, progress in the management of breast cancer patients has led to marked reductions in stage-specific breast cancer mortality, even for patients with disseminated disease (i.e. stage IV cancer) at diagnosis. In contrast, the epidemiological data point to a marginal contribution of mammography screening in the decline in breast cancer mortality. Moreover, the more effective the treatments, the less favourable are the harm-benefit balance of screening mammography. New, effective methods for breast screening are needed, as well as research on risk-based screening strategies.

Effectiveness of and overdiagnosis from mammography screening in the Netherlands: population based study

Objective To analyse stage specific incidence of breast cancer in the Netherlands where women have been invited to biennial mammography screening since 1989 (ages 50-69) and 1997 (ages 70-75), and to assess changes in breast cancer mortality and quantified overdiagnosis.Design Population based study.Setting Mammography screening programme, the Netherlands.Participants Dutch women of all ages, 1989 to 2012.Main outcome measures Stage specific age adjusted incidence of breast cancer from 1989 to 2012. The extra numbers of in situ and stage 1 breast tumours associated with screening were estimated by comparing rates in women aged 50-74 with those in age groups not invited to screening. Overdiagnosis was estimated after subtraction of the lead time cancers. Breast cancer mortality reductions and overdiagnosis during 2010-12 were computed without (scenario 1) and with (scenario 2) a cohort effect on mortality secular trends.Results The incidence of stage 2-4 breast cancers in women aged 50 or more was 168 per 100 000 in 1989 and 166 per 100 000 in 2012. Screening would be associated with a 5% mortality reduction in scenario 1 and with no influence on mortality in scenario 2. In both scenarios, improved treatments would be associated with 28% reductions in mortality. Overdiagnosis has steadily increased over time with the extension of screening to women aged 70-75 and with the introduction of digital mammography. After deduction of clinical lead time cancers, 33% of cancers found in women invited to screening in 2010-12 and 59% of screen detected cancers would be overdiagnosed.Conclusions The Dutch mammography screening programme seems to have little impact on the burden of advanced breast cancers, which suggests a marginal effect on breast cancer mortality. About half of screen detected breast cancers would represent overdiagnosis.

Breast Cancer Epidemiology, Prevention, and Screening

Globally, breast cancer is both the most commonly occurring cancer and the commonest cause of cancer death among women. Available data suggest that incidence and mortality in high-resource countries has been declining whereas incidence and mortality in low-resource countries has been increasing. This pattern is likely to be due to changing risk factor profiles and differences in access to breast cancer early detection and treatment. Risk factors for breast cancer include increasing age, race, menarche history, breast characteristics, reproductive patterns, hormone use, alcohol use, tobacco use, diet, physical activity, and body habitus. Mutations in the BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 tumor suppressor genes are significantly associated with the development of breast and ovarian cancer by the age of 70. Survival depends on both stage and molecular subtype. As there are few signs and symptoms early on, early detection is an important strategy to improve outcomes. Major professional organizations in the United States and elsewhere recommend screening with mammography with appropriate follow up for an abnormal screening test, although they differ somewhat by recommended ages and frequency of screening. Studies suggest a 15%-40% mortality reduction secondary to screening, however, there are also concerns about harms, such as overdiagnosis (5%-54%) and overtreatment leading to long term complications, and false negatives (6%-46%). Identification of women at risk for BRCA1 and BRCA 2 mutations is also recommended with referral for genetic testing. Preventive interventions, such as lifestyle, medical, and surgical options are available for women testing positive for BRCA mutations.

Trends and predictions to 2020 in breast cancer mortality in Europe

OBJECTIVES

We analyzed trends in mortality from breast cancer in women in 36 European countries and the European Union (EU) over the period 1970-2014, and predicted numbers of deaths and rates to 2020.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We derived breast cancer death certification data and population figures from the World Health Organization and Eurostat databases. We obtained 2020 estimates using a joinpoint regression model.

RESULTS

Overall, EU breast cancer mortality rates (world standard) declined from 17.9/100,000 in 2002 to 15.2 in 2012. The predicted 2020 rate is 13.4/100,000. The falls were largest in young women (20-49 years, -22% between 2002 and 2012). Within the EU, declines were larger in the United Kingdom (UK) and other northern and western European countries than in most central and eastern Europe. The UK has the second lowest predicted breast cancer mortality rate in 2020 (after Spain), starting from the highest one in 1970. Breast cancer mortality is predicted to rise in Poland, where the predicted 2020 rate is 15.3/100,000. We estimated that about 32,500 breast cancer deaths will be avoided in 2020 in the EU as compared to the peak rate of 1989, and a total of 475,000 breast cancer deaths over the period 1990-2020.

CONCLUSION

The overall favourable breast cancer mortality trends are mainly due to a succession of improvements in the management and treatment of breast cancer, though early diagnosis and screening played a role, too. Improving breast cancer management in central and eastern Europe is a priority.

A French national breast and thyroid cancer screening programme for survivors of childhood, adolescent and young adult (CAYA) cancers - DeNaCaPST programme

Background

Survival of childhood, adolescent and young adult (CAYA) cancers has increased with progress in the management of the treatments and has reached more than 80% at 5 years. Nevertheless, these survivors are at great risk of second cancers and non-malignant co-morbidities in later life. DeNaCaPST is a non-interventional study whose aim is to organize a national screening for thyroid cancer and breast cancer in survivors of CAYA cancers. It will study the compliance with international recommendations, with the aim, regarding a breast screening programme, of offering for every woman living in France, at equal risk, an equal screening.

Method

DeNaCaPST trial is coordinated by the INSERM 1018 unit in cooperation with the LEA (French Childhood Cancer Survivor Study for Leukaemia) study’s coordinators, the long term follow up committee and the paediatric radiation committee of the SFCE (French Society of Childhood Cancers).

A total of 35 centres spread across metropolitan France and la Reunion will participate. FCCSS (French Childhood Cancer Survivor Study), LEA and central registry will be interrogated to identify eligible patients. To participate, centers agreed to perform a complete “long-term follow-up consultations” according to good clinical practice and the guidelines of the SFCE (French Society of Children Cancers).

Discussion

As survival has greatly improved in childhood cancers, detection of therapy-related malignancies has become a priority even if new radiation techniques will lead to better protection for organs at risk. International guidelines have been put in place because of the evidence for increased lifetime risk of breast and thyroid cancer. DeNaCaPST is based on these international recommendations but it is important to recognize that they are based on expert consensus opinion and are supported by neither nonrandomized observational studies nor prospective randomized trials in this specific population. Over-diagnosis is a phenomenon inherent in any screening program and therefore such programs must be evaluated.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-017-3318-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.