Literature DB >> 16537348

Cumulative false positive recall rate and association with participant related factors in a population based breast cancer screening programme.

Xavier Castells1, Eduard Molins, Francesc Macià.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the cumulative false positive recall rate throughout the period of participation in a population based breast cancer screening programme and to examine its association with women related factors.
DESIGN: Analysis of a database to estimate the cumulative false positive recall rate after 10 biennial mammograms in a cohort of women. Cumulative risk after 10 rounds was calculated by projecting forward the information available on the four rounds. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between the cumulative risk of false positive recall and women related factors.
SETTING: Population based breast cancer screening programme in Barcelona City (Spain). PARTICIPANTS: 8502 women aged 50-69 years who participated in four consecutive screening rounds. Eligible women had received a mammogram in the first screening round between 1 December 1995 and 31 December 1996. MAIN
RESULTS: The false positive recall rate in the first screening for women who entered the screening programme at the age of 50-51 years was assessed at 10.6% (95% CI 8.9, 12.3). In the second screening this risk decreased to 3.8% (95% CI 2.7, 4.9) and remained almost constant in subsequent rounds. After 10 mammograms, the cumulative false positive recall rate was estimated at 32.4% (95% CI 29.7, 35.1). The factors associated with a higher cumulative risk of false positive recall were: previous benign breast disease (OR = 8.48; CI 7.39, 9.73), perimenopausal status (OR = 1.62; CI 1.12, 2.34), body mass index above 27.3 (OR = 1.17; CI 1.02, 1.34), and age 50-54 years (OR = 1.15; CI 1.00, 1.31).
CONCLUSIONS: One third of women could have at least one false positive recall over 10 biennial screens. Women participating in screening programmes should be informed about this risk, especially those with associated factors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16537348      PMCID: PMC2593411          DOI: 10.1136/jech.2005.042119

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health        ISSN: 0143-005X            Impact factor:   3.710


  21 in total

1.  Association of volume and volume-independent factors with accuracy in screening mammogram interpretation.

Authors:  Craig A Beam; Emily F Conant; Edward A Sickles
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2003-02-19       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 2.  Reporting of performance indicators of mammography screening in Europe.

Authors:  E Lynge; A H Olsen; J Fracheboud; J Patnick
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Prev       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 2.497

Review 3.  Women need better information about routine mammography.

Authors:  Hazel Thornton; Adrian Edwards; Michael Baum
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-07-12

4.  Assessment of the psychological impact of a breast screening programme.

Authors:  A R Bull; M J Campbell
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  1991-06       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  Psychological and behavioral implications of abnormal mammograms.

Authors:  C Lerman; B Trock; B K Rimer; A Boyce; C Jepson; P F Engstrom
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1991-04-15       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  Estimating the cumulative risk of a false-positive test in a repeated screening program.

Authors:  Jian-Lun Xu; Richard M Fagerstrom; Philip C Prorok; Barnett S Kramer
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  The influence of a false-positive mammogram on a woman's subsequent behaviour for detecting breast cancer.

Authors:  C Lampic; E Thurfjell; P-O Sjödén
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 9.162

8.  The cumulative risk of a false-positive recall in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program.

Authors:  Solveig Hofvind; Steinar Thoresen; Steinar Tretli
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2004-10-01       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Estimating the cumulative risk of false positive cancer screenings.

Authors:  Stuart G Baker; Diane Erwin; Barnett S Kramer
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2003-07-03       Impact factor: 4.615

10.  Impact of false-positive mammography on subsequent screening attendance and risk of cancer.

Authors:  Jenny McCann; Diane Stockton; Sara Godward
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2002-07-17       Impact factor: 6.466

View more
  17 in total

1.  False-positive mammography and depressed mood in a screening population: findings from the New Hampshire Mammography Network.

Authors:  C J Gibson; J Weiss; M Goodrich; T Onega
Journal:  J Public Health (Oxf)       Date:  2009-07-02       Impact factor: 2.341

2.  Effect of radiologist experience on the risk of false-positive results in breast cancer screening programs.

Authors:  Raquel Zubizarreta Alberdi; Ana B Fernández Llanes; Raquel Almazán Ortega; Rubén Roman Expósito; Jose M Velarde Collado; Teresa Queiro Verdes; Carmen Natal Ramos; María Ederra Sanz; Dolores Salas Trejo; Xavier Castells Oliveres
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-06-04       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Consequences of false-positive screening mammograms.

Authors:  Anna N A Tosteson; Dennis G Fryback; Cristina S Hammond; Lucy G Hanna; Margaret R Grove; Mary Brown; Qianfei Wang; Karen Lindfors; Etta D Pisano
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 21.873

4.  The psychological impact of a false-positive screening mammogram in Barcelona.

Authors:  Rebecca Espasa; Cristiane Murta-Nascimento; Ramón Bayés; Maria Sala; Montserrat Casamitjana; Francesc Macià; Xavier Castells
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 2.037

5.  Influence of false-positive mammography results on subsequent screening: do physician recommendations buffer negative effects?

Authors:  Jessica T DeFrank; Barbara K Rimer; J Michael Bowling; Jo Anne Earp; Erica S Breslau; Noel T Brewer
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 2.136

6.  Modelling the cumulative risk of a false-positive screening test.

Authors:  Rebecca A Hubbard; Diana L Miglioretti; Robert A Smith
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2010-03-31       Impact factor: 3.021

7.  Statistical Methods for Estimating the Cumulative Risk of Screening Mammography Outcomes.

Authors:  Rebecca A Hubbard; Theodora M Ripping; Jessica Chubak; Mireille J M Broeders; Diana L Miglioretti
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2015-12-31       Impact factor: 4.254

8.  Impact of intermediate mammography assessment on the likelihood of false-positive results in breast cancer screening programmes.

Authors:  Nieves Ascunce; María Ederra; Josu Delfrade; Araceli Baroja; Nieves Erdozain; Raquel Zubizarreta; Dolores Salas; Xavier Castells
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-09-08       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Long-term psychosocial consequences of false-positive screening mammography.

Authors:  John Brodersen; Volkert Dirk Siersma
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.166

10.  Effectiveness of early detection on breast cancer mortality reduction in Catalonia (Spain).

Authors:  Montserrat Rue; Ester Vilaprinyo; Sandra Lee; Montserrat Martinez-Alonso; Misericor-Dia Carles; Rafael Marcos-Gragera; Roger Pla; Josep-Alfons Espinas
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2009-09-15       Impact factor: 4.430

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.