Literature DB >> 1873566

Estimating the sensitivity of breast cancer screening--experience with the Honolulu BCDDP data.

J S Grove1, M J Goodman, F I Gilbert, G Low.   

Abstract

The 'capture-recapture' models for estimating breast cancer screening sensitivity can be generalized to include factors that affect sensitivity such as cancer size. Including such factors can help reduce the covariance between mammographic and physical exam sensitivity, which will improve the estimates. One model relating sensitivity to cancer length is presented and tested using data from the Honolulu Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project (BCDDP). The model predicts sensitivity fairly well for large breast cancers, but underestimates sensitivity for small cancers. Using both mammography and physical examination, the total screening sensitivity is estimated as 0.91 +/- 0.03 for cancers longer than 12 mm (for the second through fifth screenings for Honolulu and Tucson screening data combined). Limited data suggest similar screening sensitivities for Orientals and Caucasians in Hawaii. Shortcomings of the BCDDP data include inaccurate measurements of cancer length. Suggestions to improve data for future work are given.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1873566     DOI: 10.1007/bf02633538

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 0167-6806            Impact factor:   4.872


  9 in total

1.  A classification of methods of ascertainment and analysis in estimating the frequencies of recessives in man.

Authors:  N T J BAILEY
Journal:  Ann Eugen       Date:  1951-12

2.  Capture-recapture methods for assessing the completeness of case ascertainment when using multiple information sources.

Authors:  J T Wittes; T Colton; V W Sidel
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1974-02

3.  A generalization of the simple capture-recapture model with applications to epidemiological research.

Authors:  J Wittes; V W Sidel
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1968-08

Review 4.  Screening for breast cancer: how effective are our tests? A critical review.

Authors:  M Moskowitz
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  1983 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 508.702

5.  Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project: five-year summary report.

Authors:  L H Baker
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  1982 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 508.702

6.  Breast cancer screening in Hawaii 1974-1980: Results of a six-year program.

Authors:  M J Goodman; F I Gilbert; J S Grove; A Catts; G Low
Journal:  Hawaii Med J       Date:  1982-05

7.  The estimation of false negatives in medical screening.

Authors:  J D Goldberg; J T Wittes
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1978-03       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  Sensitivity of mammography and physical examination of the breast for detecting breast cancer.

Authors:  M J Hicks; J R Davis; J M Layton; A J Present
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1979-11-09       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Application of a capture-recapture method (the Bernoulli census) to historical epidemiology.

Authors:  R Neugebauer
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1984-10       Impact factor: 4.897

  9 in total
  1 in total

1.  Age-specific sensitivities of mammographic screening for breast cancer.

Authors:  P G Peer; A L Verbeek; H Straatman; J H Hendriks; R Holland
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 4.872

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.