BACKGROUND We used modeling techniques to assess the relative and absolute contributions of screening mammography and adjuvant treatment to the reduction in breast-cancer mortality in the United States from 1975 to 2000. METHODS A consortium of investigators developed seven independent statistical models of breast-cancer incidence and mortality. All seven groups used the same sources to obtain data on the use of screening mammography, adjuvant treatment, and benefits of treatment with respect to the rate of death from breast cancer. RESULTS The proportion of the total reduction in the rate of death from breast cancer attributed to screening varied in the seven models from 28 to 65 percent (median, 46 percent), with adjuvant treatment contributing the rest. The variability across models in the absolute contribution of screening was larger than it was for treatment, reflecting the greater uncertainty associated with estimating the benefit of screening. CONCLUSIONS Seven statistical models showed that both screening mammography and treatment have helped reduce the rate of death from breast cancer in the United States.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa050518

Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer

Each year the American Cancer Society publishes a summary of existing recommendations for early cancer detection, including updates, and/or emerging issues that are relevant to screening for cancer. In last year's article, the guidelines regarding screening for the early detection of prostate, colorectal, and endometrial cancers were updated, as was the narrative pertaining to testing for early lung cancer detection. Although none of the ACS's guidelines were updated in 2001, work is proceeding on an update of screening recommendations for breast and cervical cancer and an update of these guidelines will be announced in the January/February 2003 issue of CA. As in previous issues, we review recommendations for the "cancer-related check-up," in which clinical encounters provide case-finding and health counseling opportunities. Finally, we provide an update of the most recent data pertaining to participation rates in cancer screening by age, gender, and ethnicity from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) and National Health Interview Survey (NHIS).

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.3322/canjclin.52.1.8

American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer.

Screening with mammography uses X-ray imaging to find breast cancer before a lump can be felt. The goal is to treat cancer earlier, when a cure is more likely. The review includes seven trials that involved 600,000 women in the age range 39 to 74 years who were randomly assigned to receive screening mammograms or not. The studies which provided the most reliable information showed that screening did not reduce breast cancer mortality. Studies that were potentially more biased (less carefully done) found that screening reduced breast cancer mortality. However, screening will result in some women getting a cancer diagnosis even though their cancer would not have led to death or sickness. Currently, it is not possible to tell which women these are, and they are therefore likely to have breasts or lumps removed and to receive radiotherapy unnecessarily. If we assume that screening reduces breast cancer mortality by 15% after 13 years of follow-up and that overdiagnosis and overtreatment is at 30%, it means that for every 2000 women invited for screening throughout 10 years, one will avoid dying of breast cancer and 10 healthy women, who would not have been diagnosed if there had not been screening, will be treated unnecessarily. Furthermore, more than 200 women will experience important psychological distress including anxiety and uncertainty for years because of false positive findings.
Women invited to screening should be fully informed of both the benefits and harms. To help ensure that the requirements for informed choice for women contemplating whether or not to attend a screening programme can be met, we have written an evidence-based leaflet for lay people that is available in several languages on www.cochrane.dk. Because of substantial advances in treatment and greater breast cancer awareness since the trials were carried out, it is likely that the absolute effect of screening today is smaller than in the trials. Recent observational studies show more overdiagnosis than in the trials and very little or no reduction in the incidence of advanced cancers with screening.

/pdf/screening-for-breast-cancer-with-mammography-36k7l5kzia.pdf

Screening for breast cancer with mammography.

PURPOSE: To (a) determine the performance of screening mammography, ultrasonography (US), and physical examination (PE); (b) analyze the influence of age, hormonal status, and breast density; (c) compare the size and stage of tumors detected with each modality; and (d) determine which modality or combination of modalities optimize cancer detection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 11,130 asymptomatic women underwent 27,825 screening sessions, (mammography and subsequent PE). Women with dense breasts subsequently underwent screening US. Abnormalities were deemed positive if biopsy findings revealed malignancy and negative if findings from biopsy or all screening examinations were negative. RESULTS: In 221 women, 246 cancers were found. Sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values, and accuracy of mammography were 77.6%, 98.8%, 99.8%, 35.8%, and 98.6%, respectively; those of PE, 27.6%, 99.4%, 99.4%, 28.9%, and 98.8%, respectively; and those of US, 75.3%, 96.8%, 99.7%, 20.5%, and 96.6%,...

Comparison of the Performance of Screening Mammography, Physical Examination, and Breast US and Evaluation of Factors that Influence Them: An Analysis of 27,825 Patient Evaluations

Importance Breast cancer is a leading cause of premature mortality among US women. Early detection has been shown to be associated with reduced breast cancer morbidity and mortality. Objective To update the American Cancer Society (ACS) 2003 breast cancer screening guideline for women at average risk for breast cancer. Process The ACS commissioned a systematic evidence review of the breast cancer screening literature to inform the update and a supplemental analysis of mammography registry data to address questions related to the screening interval. Formulation of recommendations was based on the quality of the evidence and judgment (incorporating values and preferences) about the balance of benefits and harms. Evidence Synthesis Screening mammography in women aged 40 to 69 years is associated with a reduction in breast cancer deaths across a range of study designs, and inferential evidence supports breast cancer screening for women 70 years and older who are in good health. Estimates of the cumulative lifetime risk of false-positive examination results are greater if screening begins at younger ages because of the greater number of mammograms, as well as the higher recall rate in younger women. The quality of the evidence for overdiagnosis is not sufficient to estimate a lifetime risk with confidence. Analysis examining the screening interval demonstrates more favorable tumor characteristics when premenopausal women are screened annually vs biennially. Evidence does not support routine clinical breast examination as a screening method for women at average risk. Recommendations The ACS recommends that women with an average risk of breast cancer should undergo regular screening mammography starting at age 45 years (strong recommendation). Women aged 45 to 54 years should be screened annually (qualified recommendation). Women 55 years and older should transition to biennial screening or have the opportunity to continue screening annually (qualified recommendation). Women should have the opportunity to begin annual screening between the ages of 40 and 44 years (qualified recommendation). Women should continue screening mammography as long as their overall health is good and they have a life expectancy of 10 years or longer (qualified recommendation). The ACS does not recommend clinical breast examination for breast cancer screening among average-risk women at any age (qualified recommendation). Conclusions and Relevance These updated ACS guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for breast cancer screening for women at average risk of breast cancer. These recommendations should be considered by physicians and women in discussions about breast cancer screening.

/pdf/breast-cancer-screening-for-women-at-average-risk-2015-2zpe99a39l.pdf

Breast Cancer Screening for Women at Average Risk: 2015 Guideline Update From the American Cancer Society

Background. Several studies have found a smaller effect of breast cancer screening on breast cancer mortality in women aged younger than 50 years compared with older women. Various possible reasons have been suggested for this, but none firmly is established. Methods. The Swedish Two-County Study is a randomized trial of breast cancer screening of women aged 40-74 years, comprising with 133,065 women with a 13-year follow-up of 2467 cancers. The Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project (BCDDP) is a nonrandomized screening program in the United States, with a 14-year follow-up of 3778 cancers in women aged 40-74 years. The Swedish results by age were updated. The lesser effect of screening at ages 40-49 years was investigated in terms of sojourn time (the duration of the preclinical but detectable phase) size, lymph node status, and histologic type of the tumors diagnosed in the Swedish Study and their subsequent effect on survival using survival data from both studies. Results. In the Swedish Trial, a 30% reduction in mortality associated with the invitation to screening of women aged 40-74 years was maintained after 13-years of follow-up. The reduction was 34% for women aged 50-74 years and 13% for women aged 40-49 years. Results indicated that the reduced effect on mortality for women aged 40-49 years was due to a differential effect of screening on the prognostic factors of tumor size, lymph node status, and histologic type. The mean sojourn times in the age groups 40-49 years, 50-59 years, 60-69 years, and 70-74 years were 1.7, 3.3, 3.8, and 2.6 years, respectively. Conclusions. These results suggest that much, although not all, of the smaller effect of screening on mortality in women aged 40-49 years is due to faster progression of a substantial proportion of tumors in this age group and the rapid increase in incidence during this decade of life. It is concluded that the interval between screenings should be shortened to achieve a greater benefit in this age group. It is estimated that a 19% reduction in mortality would result from an annual screening regime. Cancer 1995 ;75 :2507-17.

Efficacy of breast cancer screening by age. New results swedish two-county trial

BACKGROUND

The availability of breast carcinoma data from trials of mammographic screening provides an opportunity to study the natural history of breast carcinoma.



METHODS

The Swedish Two-County study is a randomized, controlled trial of mammographic screening for breast carcinoma in which 77,080 women were randomized to receive an invitation to mammographic screening and 55,985 were randomized to receive no invitation. During the trial, a total of 2468 breast carcinoma cases were diagnosed. The authors examined the effect of screening on the pathologic attributes of the tumors diagnosed, mortality and survival from breast carcinoma, and the consequences of arresting tumor development by screening.



RESULTS

Screening reduces mortality from breast carcinoma largely through its effect in detecting tumors at a smaller size, decreasing the probability of lymph node metastases, and reducing the opportunity for worsening of the grade of malignancy of the tumor.



CONCLUSIONS

Breast carcinoma is not a systemic disease at its inception, but is a progressive disease and its development can be arrested by screening. The point at which the tumor's progression is arrested is crucial. Detection of small (<15 mm) and lymph node negative invasive tumors will save lives and confer an opportunity for less radical treatment. Tumor progression in the preclinical phase occurs more rapidly in women age <50 years, suggesting the need for a shorter screening interval for this group. Cancer 1999;86:449–62. © 1999 American Cancer Society.

The natural history of breast carcinoma: what have we learned from screening?

The sojourn time, time spent in the preclinical detectable phase (PCDP) for chronic diseases, for example, breast cancer, plays an important role in the design and assessment of screening programmes. Traditional methods to estimate it usually assume a uniform incidence rate of preclinical disease from a randomized control group or historical data. In this paper, a two-parameter Markov chain model is proposed and developed to explicitly estimate the preclinical incidence rate (λ1) and the rate of transition from preclinical to clinical state (λ2, equivalent to the inverse of mean sojourn time) without using control data. A new estimate of sensitivity is proposed, based on the estimated parameters of the Markov process. When this method is applied to the data from the Swedish two-county study of breast cancer screening in the age group 70–74, the estimate of MST is 2·3 with 95 per cent CI ranging from 2·1 to 2·5, which is close to the result based on the traditional method but the 95 per cent CI is narrower using the Markov model. The reason for the greater precision of the latter is the fuller use of all temporal data, since the continuous exact times to events are used in our method instead of grouping them as in the traditional method. Ongoing and future researches should extend this model to include, for example, the tumour size, nodal status and malignancy grade, along with methods of simultaneously estimating sensitivity and the transition rates in the Markov process.

Estimation of mean sojourn time in breast cancer screening using a Markov chain model of both entry to and exit from the preclinical detectable phase.

Researchers have noted that mammographic screening has a reduced effect on breast cancer mortality in women in their forties compared to older women. Explanations for this include poorer sensitivity in younger women due to denser breast tissue, as well as more rapid tumor progression, giving a shorter mean sojourn time (the average duration of the preclinical screen-detectable period). To test these hypotheses, we developed a series of Markov-chain models to estimate tumor progression rates and sensitivity. Parameters were estimated using tumor data from the Swedish twocounty trial of mammographic screening for breast cancer. The mean sojourn time was shorter in women aged 40‐49 compared to women aged 50‐59 and 60‐69 (2.44, 3.70, and 4.17 years, respectively). Sensitivity was lower in the 40‐49 age group compared to the two older groups (83%, 100%, and 100%, respectively). Thus, both rapid progression and poorer sensitivity are associated with the 40‐49 age group. We also modeled tumor size, node status, and malignancy grade together with subsequent breast cancer mortality and found that, to achieve a reduction in mortality commensurate with that in women over 50, the interscreening interval for women in their forties should be less than two years. We conclude that Markov models and the use of tumor size, node status, and malignancy grade as surrogates for mortality can be useful in design and analysis of future studies of breast cancer screening. [Monogr Natl Cancer Inst 1997:22: 93‐97]

Markov Models of Breast Tumor Progression: Some Age-Specific Results

The effect of mammographic screening in reducing mortality from breast cancer is known to be smaller and more delayed in women aged 40-49 than in women over 50. In this study, we investigated how these phenomena relate to histology-specific breast cancer incidence and mortality. The data are from 2,468 women with breast cancer who participated in the Swedish Two-County Trial. The overall relative breast cancer mortality of invited to noninvited women aged 40-49 was 0.87, and the relative mortality from poorly differentiated (grade 3) ductal carcinoma was 0.95. These results were not statistically significant. The corresponding relative risks for invited women aged 50-74 were a statistically significant 0.65 and 0.61. We conclude that in this trial, with a two-year interscreening interval, the smaller and later effect of invitation to screening on breast cancer mortality in women 40-49 years old is due to the failure of screening to reduce mortality from grade 3 ductal carcinoma in this age group.

/pdf/recent-results-from-the-swedish-two-county-trial-the-effects-1xj0kv1yau.pdf

Recent Results From the Swedish Two-County Trial: The Effects of Age, Histologic Type, and Mode of Detection on the Efficacy of Breast Cancer Screening

Hsiu-Hsi Chen

Papers

Efficacy of breast cancer screening by age. New results swedish two-county trial

The natural history of breast carcinoma: what have we learned from screening?

Estimation of mean sojourn time in breast cancer screening using a Markov chain model of both entry to and exit from the preclinical detectable phase.

Markov Models of Breast Tumor Progression: Some Age-Specific Results

Recent Results From the Swedish Two-County Trial: The Effects of Age, Histologic Type, and Mode of Detection on the Efficacy of Breast Cancer Screening