Back to Search Start Over

Tipping the balance of benefits and harms to favor screening mammography starting at age 40 years: a comparative modeling study of risk.

Authors :
van Ravesteyn NT
Miglioretti DL
Stout NK
Lee SJ
Schechter CB
Buist DS
Huang H
Heijnsdijk EA
Trentham-Dietz A
Alagoz O
Near AM
Kerlikowske K
Nelson HD
Mandelblatt JS
de Koning HJ
Source :
Annals of internal medicine [Ann Intern Med] 2012 May 01; Vol. 156 (9), pp. 609-17.
Publication Year :
2012

Abstract

Background: Timing of initiation of screening for breast cancer is controversial in the United States.<br />Objective: To determine the threshold relative risk (RR) at which the harm-benefit ratio of screening women aged 40 to 49 years equals that of biennial screening for women aged 50 to 74 years.<br />Design: Comparative modeling study.<br />Data Sources: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program, Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium, and medical literature.<br />Target Population: A contemporary cohort of women eligible for routine screening.<br />Time Horizon: Lifetime.<br />Perspective: Societal.<br />Intervention: Mammography screening starting at age 40 versus 50 years with different screening methods (film, digital) and screening intervals (annual, biennial).<br />Benefits: life-years gained, breast cancer deaths averted; harms: false-positive mammography findings; harm-benefit ratios: false-positive findings/life-years gained, false-positive findings/deaths averted.<br />Results of Base-Case Analysis: Screening average-risk women aged 50 to 74 years biennially yields the same false-positive findings/life-years gained as biennial screening with digital mammography starting at age 40 years for women with a 2-fold increased risk above average (median threshold RR, 1.9 [range across models, 1.5 to 4.4]). The threshold RRs are higher for annual screening with digital mammography (median, 4.3 [range, 3.3 to 10]) and when false-positive findings/deaths averted is used as an outcome measure instead of false-positive findings/life-years gained. The harm-benefit ratio for film mammography is more favorable than for digital mammography because film has a lower false-positive rate.<br />Results of Sensitivity Analysis: The threshold RRs changed slightly when a more comprehensive measure of harm was used and were relatively insensitive to lower adherence assumptions.<br />Limitation: Risk was assumed to influence onset of disease without influencing screening performance.<br />Conclusion: Women aged 40 to 49 years with a 2-fold increased risk have similar harm-benefit ratios for biennial screening mammography as average-risk women aged 50 to 74 years. Threshold RRs required for favorable harm-benefit ratios vary by screening method, interval, and outcome measure.<br />Primary Funding Source: National Cancer Institute.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1539-3704
Volume :
156
Issue :
9
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Annals of internal medicine
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
22547470
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-156-9-201205010-00002