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

Pinckney, Richard G.; Geller, Berta M.; Burman, Marcia L.; Littenberg, Benjamin

doi:10.1016/s0002-9343(02)01438-9

Cited by 41 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(19,25,33) However, in our study, men and women who had received false-positive results for baseline GC screening were less likely to return, which goes against the recommendation for GC rescreening, than those who had received true-negative results (OR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.96-0.99). However, when baseline screening methods were examined, the results were less clear.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 68%

“…This is lower than the rate for breast cancer among population-based samples in Western countries. (24)(25)(26)(27) In 1997, on-schedule mammography rescreening rates for breast cancer were 72.4-81.5% in the US National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBC-CEDP). (24) The NBCCEDP offers free screening to low-income women, which might explain the high rescreening rate.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Who participates in the gastric cancer screening and on‐time rescreening in the National Cancer Screening Program? A population‐based study in Korea

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gastric cancer (GC) screening is a major challenge in countries where the disease is highly prevalent. This study was conducted to identify the factors associated with participation in GC screening and on-time rescreening among the average-risk population in Korea. The study population was derived from the National Cancer Screening Program database. The population for this study was 22 913 618 individuals aged ‡40 years who had been invited to participate in a GC screening program from 2005 to 2006. We determined whether these individuals had attended the GC screening program and which method -an upper gastrointestinal series (UGIS) or endoscopy-they underwent. We followed the participants to determine whether they had a second GC screening after 2 years. The overall participation rate in the GC screening was 20.5%. More people underwent UGIS than endoscopy. Individuals who had been screened by endoscopy rather than UGIS were more likely to be younger, male, or those who were National Health Insurance (NHI) beneficiaries with a higher premium rate. Of those who underwent baseline screening, 59.4% participated in a rescreening program 2 years later. NHI beneficiaries with a higher premium rate were significantly more likely to be rescreened than medical aid recipients. The results from this study showed that the UGIS were more commonly used in organized GC screenings in Korea, and those who underwent UGIS were more likely to return for subsequent screening compared to those who underwent an endoscopy. (Cancer Sci 2011; 102: 2241-2247 G astric cancer (GC) is the fourth most common cancer behind lung cancer, breast cancer, and colorectal cancer, and in 2008 was the second most common cause of cancer deaths worldwide. (1) In Korea, GC is the most frequent type of cancer. (2,3) In countries where GC is highly prevalent, GC screening is offered to the average-risk population to reduce the disease burden. (4) Gastric cancer screening has shown improvements in survival rates as a result of early detection and consequently higher cure rates. (5) Therefore, many Asian countries with a high burden of GC have considered implementing GC screening for the general population. (6) Since 1960, Japan has implemented photofluorography (via an indirect upper gastrointestinal series [UGIS]) screening programs to detect GC in its early stages and prevent GC deaths. (6) The cohort studies conducted in Japan showed a significant GC mortality reduction with photofluorography screening. (5,7) In recent years, endoscopy has replaced photofluorography as the initial mass screening method in several cities in Japan. (8,9) This technique is increasingly useful for GC screening because of its high detection rate. In a study conducted in Niigata, Japan, the detection of GC by endoscopy was 2.7-4.6 times higher than that by direct or indirect UGIS. (10)(11)(12) Recently, Hosokawa et al. (13) reported an approximately 65% reduction in the GC death rate for participants screened with endoscopy. Despite this promising result, direct evidence for t...

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 68%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who participates in the gastric cancer screening and on‐time rescreening in the National Cancer Screening Program? A population‐based study in Korea

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This finding is at variance with the results of previous surveys, suggesting that a substantial fraction of women actively participating in screening mammography would be willing to be recalled for either a noninvasive or a invasive diagnostic procedure if it resulted in even a small increase in the chance of detecting a cancer [13,14]. Published estimates of the re-attendance rate after receiving false-positive mammograms range between 27 and 52% in Canada [15,16], 63 and 87% in the US [10,17], and 73 and 95% in Europe [6,18]. As noted by others [4], regional differences in re-attendance rates are likely to reflect variations in baseline participation in routine screening as well as screening interval and procedures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

“…Second, imbalances in baseline characteristics across study groups might have confounded our results. This was unlikely to occur since odds ratios were adjusted for age and previous history of screening mammography, which are strong determinants of participation [10]. However, unidentified or unmeasured confounding characteristics cannot be formally excluded.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In accordance with previous reports [10,11], attendance rates at subsequent routine screening rounds were estimated after excluding women who were over the screening age range (i.e., 75 and older), had moved out of Isère, had undergone earlier self-or general practitioner-referred private screening, had developed interval breast cancer, or were deceased. The database of women eligible for routine breast cancer screening was updated every 3 months, using the information provided by the local public health insurance agencies.…”

Section: Study Samplementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Association of diagnostic work-up with subsequent attendance in a breast cancer screening program for false-positive cases

Seigneurin

Exbrayat

Labarère

et al. 2010

Breast Cancer Res Treat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study is to determine whether the likelihood of returning for routine breast cancer screening differed for false-positive cases depending on the diagnostic work-up. Using the original data from a French population-based breast cancer screening program, we compared the attendance rates at the subsequent round of screening for 16,946 and 1,127 participants who received negative (i.e., American College of Radiology, ACR, categories 1-2) and false-positive mammograms, respectively. False-positive mammograms were categorized ACR 0 (i.e., warranting additional imaging evaluation), 3 (i.e., warranting clinical and imaging follow-up), and 4-5 (i.e., warranting biopsy). We estimated the odds ratios of attendance at subsequent screening round using logistic regression, adjusting for age and history of previous mammography. The attendance rates at the subsequent screening round were 80.6% for women who received negative mammograms versus 69.6, 74.3, and 70.1% for women who received false-positive mammograms warranting additional imaging evaluation, clinical and imaging follow-up, or biopsy, respectively. In comparison to women who received negative mammograms, the corresponding adjusted odds ratios of returning for routine screening were 0.6 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.4-0.8], 0.8 (95% CI 0.6-0.9), and 0.6 (95% CI 0.4-0.8). No significant differences were found in odds ratios of attendance across ACR categories among women who received false-positive mammograms. Similar figures were observed for attending at least one of the two subsequent screening rounds. In conclusion, in comparison to women with normal or benign findings on index mammograms, false-positive cases warranting additional imaging evaluation, clinical and imaging follow-up, or biopsy had uniformly decreased odds of attending subsequent routine screening rounds.

show abstract

Breast Cancer Screening

Kerlikowske

2009

Breast Cancer Epidemiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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

Cited by 41 publications

References 15 publications

Who participates in the gastric cancer screening and on‐time rescreening in the National Cancer Screening Program? A population‐based study in Korea

Who participates in the gastric cancer screening and on‐time rescreening in the National Cancer Screening Program? A population‐based study in Korea

Association of diagnostic work-up with subsequent attendance in a breast cancer screening program for false-positive cases

Breast Cancer Screening

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About