Literature DB >> 12644536

Frequency and predictive value of a mammographic recommendation for short-interval follow-up.

Shagufta Yasmeen1, Patrick S Romano, Mary Pettinger, Rowan T Chlebowski, John A Robbins, Dorothy S Lane, Susan L Hendrix.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A recommendation for short-interval follow-up of "probably benign finding" is associated with up to 11% of screening mammograms, but its predictive value for breast cancer is unclear. We examined the predictive values (i.e., the percentage of women with a diagnosis of breast cancer 2 years after a short-interval follow-up recommendation) and likelihood ratios (derived from the pretest and post-test odds of breast cancer in the Women's Health Initiative sample) for breast cancer that are associated with a recommendation for short-interval follow-up among postmenopausal women.
METHODS: We performed a longitudinal analysis of a prospective cohort of 68 126 postmenopausal women (aged 50-79 years) who were participating in clinical trials as part of the Women's Health Initiative at 40 centers across the United States. Eligible participants had screening mammograms at baseline and at least 2 years of follow-up that included a repeat mammography. Outcomes measured were breast cancer events at 1 and 2 years after baseline and the results of subsequent mammograms. All P values were two-sided.
RESULTS: A total of 2927 (5%) of the 58 408 eligible women had baseline mammograms that included recommendations for short-interval follow-up. The incidence of breast cancer for women with a short-interval follow-up recommendation was 1.0% at 2 years after the baseline mammogram compared with breast cancer incidences of 0.6% and 0.5% for women whose baseline mammograms were described as "benign" and "negative," respectively. Across the 40 participating centers, the prevalence of short-interval follow-up recommendations among baseline mammograms varied from 1.2% to 9.8% (P<.001), even when the analysis was adjusted for key variables in regression models. Centers reporting higher frequencies of such recommendations did not have lower positive predictive values for breast cancer than centers reporting lower frequencies. The likelihood ratio for breast cancer after a recommendation for short-interval follow-up on a subsequent mammogram was 2.20 (95% confidence interval = 1.65 to 2.86).
CONCLUSION: Having a mammographic recommendation for short-interval follow-up was associated with a low positive predictive value for breast cancer among postmenopausal women during a 2-year follow-up. This result suggests that the current criteria for this recommendation-repeat mammography within 6 months-should be reconsidered.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12644536     DOI: 10.1093/jnci/95.6.429

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  21 in total

1.  The positive predictive value of the breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) as a method of quality assessment in breast imaging in a hospital population.

Authors:  Harmine M Zonderland; Thomas L Pope; Arend J Nieborg
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2004-07-09       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  The Effect of Budgetary Restrictions on Breast Cancer Diagnostic Decisions.

Authors:  Mehmet U S Ayvaci; Oguzhan Alagoz; Elizabeth S Burnside
Journal:  Manuf Serv Oper Manag       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 7.600

3.  BI-RADS Category 3 Comparison: Probably Benign Category after Recall from Screening before and after Implementation of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.

Authors:  Elizabeth S McDonald; Anne Marie McCarthy; Susan P Weinstein; Mitchell D Schnall; Emily F Conant
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2017-07-17       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Estrogen alone in postmenopausal women and breast cancer detection by means of mammography and breast biopsy.

Authors:  Rowan T Chlebowski; Garnet Anderson; JoAnn E Manson; Mary Pettinger; Shagufta Yasmeen; Dorothy Lane; Robert D Langer; F Allan Hubbell; Anne McTiernan; Susan Hendrix; Robert Schenken; Marcia L Stefanick
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-05-03       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Optimal Policies for Reducing Unnecessary Follow-up Mammography Exams in Breast Cancer Diagnosis.

Authors:  Oguzhan Alagoz; Jagpreet Chhatwal; Elizabeth S Burnside
Journal:  Decis Anal       Date:  2013-09

6.  BI-RADS categorisation of 2,708 consecutive nonpalpable breast lesions in patients referred to a dedicated breast care unit.

Authors:  A-S Hamy; S Giacchetti; M Albiter; C de Bazelaire; C Cuvier; F Perret; S Bonfils; P Charvériat; H Hocini; A de Roquancourt; M Espie
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-07-16       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Incidence, detection, and tumour stage of breast cancer in a cohort of Italian women with negative screening mammography report recommending early (short-interval) rescreen.

Authors:  Alessandra Ravaioli; Flavia Foca; Americo Colamartini; Fabio Falcini; Carlo Naldoni; Alba C Finarelli; Priscilla Sassoli de Bianchi; Lauro Bucchi
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2010-02-01       Impact factor: 8.775

8.  Probably benign lesions at screening breast US in a population with elevated risk: prevalence and rate of malignancy in the ACRIN 6666 trial.

Authors:  Richard G Barr; Zheng Zhang; Jean B Cormack; Ellen B Mendelson; Wendie A Berg
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2013-10-28       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  A history of breast cancer and older age allow risk stratification of mammographic BI-RADS 3 ratings in the diagnostic setting.

Authors:  Matthias Benndorf; Yirong Wu; Elizabeth S Burnside
Journal:  Clin Imaging       Date:  2015-10-27       Impact factor: 1.605

10.  Utilization and cost of diagnostic imaging and biopsies following positive screening mammography in the southern breast cancer screening region of the Netherlands, 2000-2005.

Authors:  Lucien E M Duijm; Johanna H Groenewoud; Jacques Fracheboud; Menno L Plaisier; Rudi M H Roumen; B Martin van Ineveld; Mike van Beek; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-05-20       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.