Literature DB >> 20837718

False-positive results in the randomized controlled trial of mammographic screening from age 40 ("Age" trial).

Louise E Johns1, Sue M Moss.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: False-positive recall is a recognized disadvantage of mammographic breast screening, and the rate of such recalls may be higher in younger women, potentially limiting the value of screening below age 50.
METHODS: Attendance and screening outcome data for 53,884 women in the intervention arm of the U.K. Age trial were analyzed to report observed false-positive recall rates during 13 years of trial fieldwork. The Age trial was a randomized controlled trial of the effect of mammographic screening from age 40 on breast cancer mortality, conducted in 23 National Health Service screening centers between 1991 and 2004. Women randomized to the intervention arm were offered annual invitation to mammography from age 40 or 41 to age 48.
RESULTS: Overall, 7,893 women (14.6% of women the intervention arm and 18.1% of women attending at least one routine screen) experienced one or more false-positive screen during the trial. The rates of false-positive mammography at first and subsequent routine screens were 4.9% and 3.2%, respectively. The cumulative false-positive rate over seven screens was 20.5%. Eighty-nine percent of women who had a false-positive recall at their previous screen attended their next invitation to routine screening.
CONCLUSIONS: The rates of false-positive recall in the Age trial were comparable with the national screening program; however, the positive predictive value of referral was lower. Experiencing a false-positive screen did not seem to lessen the likelihood of re-attendance in the trial. IMPACT: The question of greatly increased false-positive rates in this age group and of their compromising re-attendance is refuted by the findings of this study. ©2010 AACR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20837718      PMCID: PMC2978129          DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-10-0623

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  29 in total

1.  Effect of false-positive mammograms on return for subsequent screening mammography.

Authors:  Richard G Pinckney; Berta M Geller; Marcia Burman; Benjamin Littenberg
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  2003-02-01       Impact factor: 4.965

2.  Impact of use of hormone replacement therapy on false positive recall in the NHS breast screening programme: results from the Million Women Study.

Authors:  Emily Banks; Gillian Reeves; Valerie Beral; Diana Bull; Barbara Crossley; Moya Simmonds; Elizabeth Hilton; Stephen Bailey; Nigel Barrett; Peter Briers; Ruth English; Alan Jackson; Elizabeth Kutt; Janet Lavelle; Linda Rockall; Matthew G Wallis; Mary Wilson; Julietta Patnick
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-05-29

3.  Early detection programme for breast cancer in Navarra, Spain.

Authors:  N Ascunce; A del Moral; A Murillo; C Alfaro; L Apesteguia; J Ros; L Abascal; M Aizcorbe; F Domínguez; J J Iñigo
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Prev       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 2.497

4.  Widening inequality of health in northern England, 1981-91.

Authors:  P Phillimore; A Beattie; P Townsend
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1994-04-30

5.  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

6.  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

7.  Does biopsy, aspiration or six-month follow-up of a false-positive mammogram reduce future screening or have large psychosocial effects?

Authors:  Beverly V Currence; Etta D Pisano; Jo Anne Earp; Alexis Moore; Yen-Feng Chiu; Marylee E Brown; Kerrie L Kurgat
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 3.173

8.  Neglected aspects of false positive findings of mammography in breast cancer screening: analysis of false positive cases from the Stockholm trial.

Authors:  E Lidbrink; J Elfving; J Frisell; E Jonsson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-02-03

9.  Comparison of various characteristics of women who do and do not attend for breast cancer screening.

Authors:  Emily Banks; Valerie Beral; Rebecca Cameron; Ann Hogg; Nicola Langley; Isobel Barnes; Diana Bull; Gillian Reeves; Ruth English; Sarah Taylor; Jon Elliman; Carole Lole Harris
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2001-11-06       Impact factor: 6.466

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

Review 1.  Breast cancer screening: an evidence-based update.

Authors:  Mackenzie S Fuller; Christoph I Lee; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  Med Clin North Am       Date:  2015-03-05       Impact factor: 5.456

2.  Ultrasound as the Primary Screening Test for Breast Cancer: Analysis From ACRIN 6666.

Authors:  Wendie A Berg; Andriy I Bandos; Ellen B Mendelson; Daniel Lehrer; Roberta A Jong; Etta D Pisano
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2015-12-28       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  Personalized Screening for Breast Cancer: Rationale, Present Practices, and Future Directions.

Authors:  Tanir M Allweis; Naama Hermann; Rinat Berenstein-Molho; Michal Guindy
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 5.344

4.  Beyond the mammography debate: a moderate perspective.

Authors:  C Kaniklidis
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 3.677

5.  Multi-Class Classification of Breast Cancer Using 6B-Net with Deep Feature Fusion and Selection Method.

Authors:  Muhammad Junaid Umer; Muhammad Sharif; Seifedine Kadry; Abdullah Alharbi
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2022-04-26

6.  Comparing CISNET Breast Cancer Incidence and Mortality Predictions to Observed Clinical Trial Results of Mammography Screening from Ages 40 to 49.

Authors:  Jeroen J van den Broek; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Hui Huang; Mehmet Ali Ergun; Elizabeth S Burnside; Cong Xu; Yisheng Li; Oguzhan Alagoz; Sandra J Lee; Natasha K Stout; Juhee Song; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Sylvia K Plevritis; Sue M Moss; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 7.  Is the false-positive rate in mammography in North America too high?

Authors:  Michelle T Le; Carmel E Mothersill; Colin B Seymour; Fiona E McNeill
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-06-08       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  Annual mammographic screening to reduce breast cancer mortality in women from age 40 years: long-term follow-up of the UK Age RCT.

Authors:  Stephen Duffy; Daniel Vulkan; Howard Cuckle; Dharmishta Parmar; Shama Sheikh; Robert Smith; Andrew Evans; Oleg Blyuss; Louise Johns; Ian Ellis; Peter Sasieni; Chris Wale; Jonathan Myles; Sue Moss
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 4.014

Review 9.  Screening for breast cancer with mammography.

Authors:  Peter C Gøtzsche; Karsten Juhl Jørgensen
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2013-06-04

10.  Deep Learning-Based Multi-Class Classification of Breast Digital Pathology Images.

Authors:  Weiming Mi; Junjie Li; Yucheng Guo; Xinyu Ren; Zhiyong Liang; Tao Zhang; Hao Zou
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 3.989

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.