Mammography Screening: Philosophy – Evidence for and against



Fig. 7.1
Changes in breast cancer mortality by age group, expressed as European age standardised mortality rates per 100,000 population, by age, females, UK. 1971–2011 (Cancer Research UK, http://​www.​cancerresearchuk​.​org/​cancer-info/​cancerstats/​types/​skin/​incidence, March 2014)



A more useful estimate of the effect of mammographic screening comes from randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Here, populations of women were randomised to either undergo several rounds of screening (mostly about every 2 years) or no screening. The effect on the risk of dying from breast cancer was then measured. Figure 7.2 shows a meta-analysis of the main trials from the Marmot review [2]. This shows a reduction in the risk of dying from breast cancer in the screened women compared to the unscreened of 20 %. This is a relative risk reduction; the absolute benefit depends on the risk of dying of breast cancer. If it is assumed that

A320558_1_En_7_Fig2_HTML.jpg


Fig. 7.2
Meta-analysis of the breast cancer screening trials: relative risk (RR) of breast cancer mortality after 13 years of follow-up. Note: Malmö II is excluded because follow-up approximating 13 years was not available; the Swedish Two County (Kopparberg and Östergötland) and Canada I and II trials are split into their component parts; the Edinburgh trial is excluded because of severe imbalances between randomised groups (Reproduced with permission from British Journal of Cancer [2])




  • the female UK population aged 50–70 are screened from age 50 for 20 years,


  • they gain no benefit for the first 5 years (because of the relatively long natural history of breast cancer)


  • the effect on mortality continues up to 10 years after screening (again because of the long natural history of breast cancer)

Then there would be an effect on the mortality of women aged 55–79. The risk of dying of breast cancer (without any effect of screening) for this age group is 2.13 %. A reduction of 20 % in this mortality is 0.43 % which equates to 43 deaths prevented for every 100,000 women invited for screening, corresponding to one breast cancer death prevented for every 235 women invited for screening [2].

There have been numerous publications examining the impact of screening on populations. As mentioned above, they need to allow for the effect of other factors on incidence, changes in treatment, lead time bias etc. and differences in the assumptions to account for these other factors make it difficult to produce a reliable measure of the impact of screening. Thus, the results of RCTs (albeit they were started several decades ago) remain the most reliable measure.



Risks of Screening


The potential risks of screening can be considered under two main headings. Firstly, there is the anticipated (and readily measurable) risk of women being recalled for further investigation if their mammogram is deemed abnormal and secondly the risk of overdiagnosis.


Recall


Figure 7.3 summarises the recall rate, biopsy rate etc. for the UK Breast Screening programme. It shows that, for 100,000 women invited for screening, 2,522 women (3,105 recalled minus the 583 diagnosed with cancer =2,522) were recalled and found not to have cancer. This is called a false positive result (i.e. 3.36 % of all the women screened). Of the women recalled and found not to have cancer, the majority (1,744/2,522 = 69 %) had only further imaging (mammography, ultrasound etc.) but a minority (778/2,522 = 31 %) had a biopsy. This was core biopsy under local anaesthetic in all except 2.3 % (57/2,522) who had an open biopsy under general anaesthetic. The latter group represents only 0.076 % (57/75,057) of all women screened.

A320558_1_En_7_Fig3_HTML.jpg


Fig. 7.3
Overall cancer detection rate is 583/75,057 = 7.8 cancers/1,000 women screened. Of the 3105 women recalled, 583 (18.7 %) will be diagnosed with invasive or in-situ cancer. Data extracted for women aged 50–70 for year 2009/10 (refs. NHS Breast Screening Programme Annual Review 2011 (UK) and the NHS Breast Screening Programme Report, England 2009/10 www.​ic.​nhs.​uk) (Reproduced with permission from British Journal of Cancer [2])

There are psychological effects of a false-positive result on women but the studies show conflicting results. A recent systematic review of the literature [3] concluded that, in the population at general risk of breast cancer, a false-positive result can cause breast cancer specific psychological distress which may endure for up to 3 years. The degree of distress is associated with the level of invasiveness of subsequent assessment. Some studies found that the distress caused by a false-positive result deterred some women from re-attending for breast screening which would reduce any benefit they would otherwise have got from being offered screening in the first place. The level of distress can be mitigated by providing women with clearly worded information about the recall and appropriate support from clinical staff before and during assessment [3]. Further information about caring for patients and clients can be found in Part II of this book.

Only gold members can continue reading. Log In or Register to continue

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

May 29, 2017 | Posted by in GYNECOLOGY | Comments Off on Mammography Screening: Philosophy – Evidence for and against

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access