Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 2/2014

01.06.2014 | Clinical Trial

Re-attendance at biennial screening mammography following a repeated false positive recall

verfasst von: Elisabeth G. Klompenhouwer, Lucien E. M. Duijm, Adri C. Voogd, Gerard J. den Heeten, Luc J. Strobbe, Marieke W. Louwman, Jan Willem Coebergh, Dick Venderink, Mireille J. M. Broeders

Erschienen in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Ausgabe 2/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

We determined the re-attendance rate at screening mammography after a single or a repeated false positive recall and we assessed the effects of transition from screen-film mammography (SFM) to full-field digital mammography (FFDM) on screening outcome in women recalled twice for the same mammographic abnormality. The study population consisted of a consecutive series of 302,912 SFM and 90,288 FFDM screens. During a 2 years follow-up period (until the next biennial screen), we collected the breast imaging reports and biopsy results of all recalled women. Re-attendance at biennial screening mammography was 93.2 % (95 % CI 93.1–93.3 %) for women with a negative screen (i.e., no recall at screening mammography), 65.4 % (95 % CI 64.0–66.8 %) for women recalled once, 56.7 % (95 % CI 47.1–66.4 %) for women recalled twice but for different lesions and 44.3 % (95 % CI 31.4–57.1 %) for women recalled twice for the same lesion. FFDM recalls comprised a significantly larger proportion of women who had been recalled twice for the same lesion (1.9 % of recalls (52 women) at FFDM vs. 0.9 % of recalls (37 women) at SFM, P < 0.001) and the positive predictive value of these recalls (PPV) was significantly lower at FFDM (15.4 vs. 35.1 %, P = 0.03). At review, 20 of 52 women (39.5 %, all with benign outcome) would not have been recalled for a second time at FFDM if the previous hard copy SFM screen had been available for comparison. We conclude that a repeated false positive recall for the same lesion significantly lowered the probability of screening re-attendance. The first round of FFDM significantly increased the proportion of women recalled twice for the same lesion, with a significantly lower PPV of these lesions. Almost 40 % of repeatedly recalled women would not have been recalled the second time if the previous hard copy SFM screen had been available for comparison at the time of FFDM.
Literatur
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Duijm LE, Groenewoud JH, Fracheboud J, Plaisier ML, Roumen RM, van Ineveld BM, van Beek M, de Koning HJ (2008) Utilization and cost of diagnostic imaging and biopsies following positive screening mammography in the southern breast cancer screening region of the Netherlands, 2000–2005. Eur Radiol 18(11):2390–2397. doi:10.1007/s00330-008-1043-5 PubMedCrossRef Duijm LE, Groenewoud JH, Fracheboud J, Plaisier ML, Roumen RM, van Ineveld BM, van Beek M, de Koning HJ (2008) Utilization and cost of diagnostic imaging and biopsies following positive screening mammography in the southern breast cancer screening region of the Netherlands, 2000–2005. Eur Radiol 18(11):2390–2397. doi:10.​1007/​s00330-008-1043-5 PubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Brett J, Austoker J (2001) Women who are recalled for further investigation for breast screening: psychological consequences 3 years after recall and factors affecting re-attendance. J Public Health Med 23(4):292–300PubMedCrossRef Brett J, Austoker J (2001) Women who are recalled for further investigation for breast screening: psychological consequences 3 years after recall and factors affecting re-attendance. J Public Health Med 23(4):292–300PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Brewer NT, Salz T, Lillie SE (2007) Systematic review: the long-term effects of false-positive mammograms. Ann Intern Med 146(7):502–510PubMedCrossRef Brewer NT, Salz T, Lillie SE (2007) Systematic review: the long-term effects of false-positive mammograms. Ann Intern Med 146(7):502–510PubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Roman R, Sala M, De La Vega M, Natal C, Galceran J, Gonzalez-Roman I, Baroja A, Zubizarreta R, Ascunce N, Salas D, Castells X (2011) Effect of false-positives and women’s characteristics on long-term adherence to breast cancer screening. Breast Cancer Res Treat 130(2):543–552. doi:10.1007/s10549-011-1581-4 PubMedCrossRef Roman R, Sala M, De La Vega M, Natal C, Galceran J, Gonzalez-Roman I, Baroja A, Zubizarreta R, Ascunce N, Salas D, Castells X (2011) Effect of false-positives and women’s characteristics on long-term adherence to breast cancer screening. Breast Cancer Res Treat 130(2):543–552. doi:10.​1007/​s10549-011-1581-4 PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Seigneurin A, Exbrayat C, Labarere J, Delafosse P, Poncet F, Colonna M (2011) Association of diagnostic work-up with subsequent attendance in a breast cancer screening program for false-positive cases. Breast Cancer Res Treat 127(1):221–228. doi:10.1007/s10549-010-1118-2 PubMedCrossRef Seigneurin A, Exbrayat C, Labarere J, Delafosse P, Poncet F, Colonna M (2011) Association of diagnostic work-up with subsequent attendance in a breast cancer screening program for false-positive cases. Breast Cancer Res Treat 127(1):221–228. doi:10.​1007/​s10549-010-1118-2 PubMedCrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Setz-Pels W, Duijm LE, Coebergh JW, Rutten M, Nederend J, Voogd AC (2013) Re-attendance after false-positive screening mammography: a population-based study in the Netherlands. Br J Cancer. doi:10.1038/bjc.2013.573 PubMed Setz-Pels W, Duijm LE, Coebergh JW, Rutten M, Nederend J, Voogd AC (2013) Re-attendance after false-positive screening mammography: a population-based study in the Netherlands. Br J Cancer. doi:10.​1038/​bjc.​2013.​573 PubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Alamo-Junquera D, Murta-Nascimento C, Macia F, Bare M, Galceran J, Ascunce N, Zubizarreta R, Salas D, Roman R, Castells X, Sala M (2012) Effect of false-positive results on reattendance at breast cancer screening programmes in Spain. Eur J Public Health 22(3):404–408. doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckr057 PubMedCrossRef Alamo-Junquera D, Murta-Nascimento C, Macia F, Bare M, Galceran J, Ascunce N, Zubizarreta R, Salas D, Roman R, Castells X, Sala M (2012) Effect of false-positive results on reattendance at breast cancer screening programmes in Spain. Eur J Public Health 22(3):404–408. doi:10.​1093/​eurpub/​ckr057 PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Nederend J, Duijm LE, Louwman MW, Groenewoud JH, Donkers-van Rossum AB, Voogd AC (2012) Impact of transition from analog screening mammography to digital screening mammography on screening outcome in The Netherlands: a population-based study. Ann Oncol 23(12):3098–3103. doi:10.1093/annonc/mds146 PubMedCrossRef Nederend J, Duijm LE, Louwman MW, Groenewoud JH, Donkers-van Rossum AB, Voogd AC (2012) Impact of transition from analog screening mammography to digital screening mammography on screening outcome in The Netherlands: a population-based study. Ann Oncol 23(12):3098–3103. doi:10.​1093/​annonc/​mds146 PubMedCrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Bluekens AM, Karssemeijer N, Beijerinck D, Deurenberg JJ, van Engen RE, Broeders MJ, den Heeten GJ (2010) Consequences of digital mammography in population-based breast cancer screening: initial changes and long-term impact on referral rates. Eur Radiol 20(9):2067–2073. doi:10.1007/s00330-010-1786-7 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Bluekens AM, Karssemeijer N, Beijerinck D, Deurenberg JJ, van Engen RE, Broeders MJ, den Heeten GJ (2010) Consequences of digital mammography in population-based breast cancer screening: initial changes and long-term impact on referral rates. Eur Radiol 20(9):2067–2073. doi:10.​1007/​s00330-010-1786-7 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat van Luijt PA, Fracheboud J, Heijnsdijk EA, den Heeten GJ, de Koning HJ (2013) Nation-wide data on screening performance during the transition to digital mammography: observations in 6 million screens. Eur J Cancer. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2013.06.020 PubMed van Luijt PA, Fracheboud J, Heijnsdijk EA, den Heeten GJ, de Koning HJ (2013) Nation-wide data on screening performance during the transition to digital mammography: observations in 6 million screens. Eur J Cancer. doi:10.​1016/​j.​ejca.​2013.​06.​020 PubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Fracheboud J, de Koning HJ, Boer R, Groenewoud JH, Verbeek AL, Broeders MJ, van Ineveld BM, Hendriks JH, de Bruyn AE, Holland R, van der Maas PJ (2001) Nationwide breast cancer screening programme fully implemented in The Netherlands. Breast 10(1):6–11. doi:10.1054/brst.2000.0212 PubMedCrossRef Fracheboud J, de Koning HJ, Boer R, Groenewoud JH, Verbeek AL, Broeders MJ, van Ineveld BM, Hendriks JH, de Bruyn AE, Holland R, van der Maas PJ (2001) Nationwide breast cancer screening programme fully implemented in The Netherlands. Breast 10(1):6–11. doi:10.​1054/​brst.​2000.​0212 PubMedCrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Duijm LE, Groenewoud JH, Hendriks JH, de Koning HJ (2004) Independent double reading of screening mammograms in The Netherlands: effect of arbitration following reader disagreements. Radiology 231(2):564–570. doi:10.1148/radiol.2312030665 PubMedCrossRef Duijm LE, Groenewoud JH, Hendriks JH, de Koning HJ (2004) Independent double reading of screening mammograms in The Netherlands: effect of arbitration following reader disagreements. Radiology 231(2):564–570. doi:10.​1148/​radiol.​2312030665 PubMedCrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Maes RM, Dronkers DJ, Hendriks JH, Thijssen MA, Nab HW (1997) Do non-specific minimal signs in a biennial mammographic breast cancer screening programme need further diagnostic assessment? Br J Radiol 70:34–38PubMed Maes RM, Dronkers DJ, Hendriks JH, Thijssen MA, Nab HW (1997) Do non-specific minimal signs in a biennial mammographic breast cancer screening programme need further diagnostic assessment? Br J Radiol 70:34–38PubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Sobin LH, Wittekind C (2002) TNM classification of malignant tumours. Wiley-Liss, New York Sobin LH, Wittekind C (2002) TNM classification of malignant tumours. Wiley-Liss, New York
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Edge S, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A (eds) (2010) AJCC cancer staging manual, 7th edn. Springer, New York Edge S, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A (eds) (2010) AJCC cancer staging manual, 7th edn. Springer, New York
22.
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Feeley L, Kiernan D, Mooney T, Flanagan F, Hargaden G, Kell M, Stokes M, Kennedy M (2011) Digital mammography in a screening programme and its implications for pathology: a comparative study. J Clin Pathol 64(3):215–219. doi:10.1136/jcp.2010.085860 PubMedCrossRef Feeley L, Kiernan D, Mooney T, Flanagan F, Hargaden G, Kell M, Stokes M, Kennedy M (2011) Digital mammography in a screening programme and its implications for pathology: a comparative study. J Clin Pathol 64(3):215–219. doi:10.​1136/​jcp.​2010.​085860 PubMedCrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Del Turco MR, Mantellini P, Ciatto S, Bonardi R, Martinelli F, Lazzari B, Houssami N (2007) Full-field digital versus screen-film mammography: comparative accuracy in concurrent screening cohorts. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189(4):860–866. doi:10.2214/AJR.07.2303 PubMedCrossRef Del Turco MR, Mantellini P, Ciatto S, Bonardi R, Martinelli F, Lazzari B, Houssami N (2007) Full-field digital versus screen-film mammography: comparative accuracy in concurrent screening cohorts. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189(4):860–866. doi:10.​2214/​AJR.​07.​2303 PubMedCrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Hambly NM, McNicholas MM, Phelan N, Hargaden GC, O’Doherty A, Flanagan FL (2009) Comparison of digital mammography and screen-film mammography in breast cancer screening: a review in the Irish breast screening program. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193(4):1010–1018. doi:10.2214/AJR.08.2157 PubMedCrossRef Hambly NM, McNicholas MM, Phelan N, Hargaden GC, O’Doherty A, Flanagan FL (2009) Comparison of digital mammography and screen-film mammography in breast cancer screening: a review in the Irish breast screening program. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193(4):1010–1018. doi:10.​2214/​AJR.​08.​2157 PubMedCrossRef
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Karssemeijer N, Bluekens AM, Beijerinck D, Deurenberg JJ, Beekman M, Visser R, van Engen R, Bartels-Kortland A, Broeders MJ (2009) Breast cancer screening results 5 years after introduction of digital mammography in a population-based screening program. Radiology 253(2):353–358. doi:10.1148/radiol.2532090225 PubMedCrossRef Karssemeijer N, Bluekens AM, Beijerinck D, Deurenberg JJ, Beekman M, Visser R, van Engen R, Bartels-Kortland A, Broeders MJ (2009) Breast cancer screening results 5 years after introduction of digital mammography in a population-based screening program. Radiology 253(2):353–358. doi:10.​1148/​radiol.​2532090225 PubMedCrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Visser R, Veldkamp WJ, Beijerinck D, Bun PA, Deurenberg JJ, Imhof-Tas MW, Schuur KH, Snoeren MM, den Heeten GJ, Karssemeijer N, Broeders MJ (2012) Increase in perceived case suspiciousness due to local contrast optimisation in digital screening mammography. Eur Radiol 22(4):908–914. doi:10.1007/s00330-011-2320-2 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Visser R, Veldkamp WJ, Beijerinck D, Bun PA, Deurenberg JJ, Imhof-Tas MW, Schuur KH, Snoeren MM, den Heeten GJ, Karssemeijer N, Broeders MJ (2012) Increase in perceived case suspiciousness due to local contrast optimisation in digital screening mammography. Eur Radiol 22(4):908–914. doi:10.​1007/​s00330-011-2320-2 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Re-attendance at biennial screening mammography following a repeated false positive recall
verfasst von
Elisabeth G. Klompenhouwer
Lucien E. M. Duijm
Adri C. Voogd
Gerard J. den Heeten
Luc J. Strobbe
Marieke W. Louwman
Jan Willem Coebergh
Dick Venderink
Mireille J. M. Broeders
Publikationsdatum
01.06.2014
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Ausgabe 2/2014
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-014-2959-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2014

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 2/2014 Zur Ausgabe

Update Onkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.