Skip to main content
Log in

Age-specific sensitivities of mammographic screening for breast cancer

  • Report
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The sensitivity of the mammographic screening test in the biennial screening program of Nijmegen is assessed by analyzing the occurrence of interval cancers, i.e. cancers surfacing clinically in the interval between a negative screening examination and the subsequent scheduled examination. The difference between the observed number of interval cancers and the expected number of clinically manifest cancers in the absence of screening for the interval period reflects the number of cancers detected by screening. The expected number should be limited by the number of those cancers that were not detectable at the time of the screening examination because their size was under the threshold of mammographic detectability (5 mm). In contrast to other sensitivity studies we took these ‘fast growing’ cancers into consideration, the numbers of which are estimated in each of the six-month periods of the two-year interval using age-specific tumor volume growth rates for three age groups: < 50, 50–69, and ≥ 70 years. In patients under age 50, the sensitivity was 64% for cancers which would become clinically manifest within one year after screening. This sensitivity was lower than those obtained from the 50–69 and ≥ 70 age groups, being 85% and 80%, respectively. For cancers that would become clinically manifest 12–18 months after screening, sensitivity decreases to 22% in the under age 50 group, and to 56% and 65% in the two above age 50 groups, respectively. We conclude that even when adjusted for growth rate, the mammographic screening test has a poor performance in the under age 50 group.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Hurley SF, Kaldor JM: The benefits and risks of mammographic screening for breast cancer. Epidemiol Rev 14: 101–130, 1992

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Fletcher SW, Black W, Harris R, Rimer BK, Shapiro S: Report of the International Workshop on Screening for Breast Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 85: 1644–1656, 1993

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Peer PGM, van Dijck JAAM, Hendriks JHCL, Holland R, Verbeek ALM: Age-dependent growth rate of primary breast cancer. Cancer 71: 3547–3551, 1993

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Day NE, Walter SD: Simplified models of screening for chronic disease: estimation procedures from mass screening programmes. Biometrics 40: 1–14, 1984

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Frisell J, Eklund G, Hellström L, Somell A: Analysis of interval breast carcinomas in a randomized screening trial in Stockholm. Breast Cancer Res Treat 9: 219–225, 1987

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Baines CJ, McFarlane DV, Miller AB: The role of the reference radiologist. Estimates of inter-observer agreement and potential delay in cancer detection in the National Breast Screening Study. Investigative Radiology 25: 971–976, 1990

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Van Dijck JAAM, Verbeek ALM, Hendriks JHCL, Holland R: The current detectability of breast cancer in a mammographic screening program. A review of the previous mammograms of interval and screen-detected cancers. Cancer 72: 1933–1938, 1993

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Tabár L, Fagerberg G, Day NE, Holmberg L: What is the optimum interval between mammographic screening examinations? — An analysis based on the latest results of the Swedish two-county breast cancer screening trial. Br J Cancer 55: 547–551, 1987

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Paci E, Ciatto S, Buiatti E, Cecchini S, Palli D, Rosselli del Turco M: Early indicators of efficacy of breast cancer screening programmes. Results of the Florence district programme. Int J Cancer 46: 198–202, 1990

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Frisell J, Eklund G, Hellström L, Lidbrink E, Rutqvist LE, Somell A: Randomized study of mammography screening — preliminary report on mortality in the Stockholm trial. Breast Cancer Res Treat 18: 49–56, 1991

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Brekelmans CTM, Collette HJA, Collette C, Fracheboud J, de Waard F: Breast cancer after a negative screen: follow-up of women participating in the DOM screening programme. Eur J Cancer 28A: 893–895, 1992

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Moss SM, Coleman DA, Ellman R, Chamberlain J, Forrest APM, Kirkpatrick AE, Thomas BA, Price JL: Interval cancers and sensitivity in the screening centres of the UK trial of early detection of breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 29A: 255–258, 1993

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Day NE: Estimating the sensitivity of a screening test. J Epidemiol Community Health 39: 364–366, 1985

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Peeters PHM, Verbeek ALM, Hendriks JHCL, van Bon MJH: Screening for breast cancer in Nijmegen. Report of 6 screening rounds, 1975–1986. Int J Cancer 43: 226–230, 1989

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Day NE, Williams DRR, Khaw KT: Breast cancer screening programmes: the development of a monitoring and evaluation system. Br J Cancer 59: 954–958, 1989

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Alexander FE: Estimation of sojourn time distributions and false negative rates in screening programmes which use two modalities. Statistics in Medicine 8: 743–755, 1989

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Brookmeyer R, Day NE: Two-stage models for the analysis of cancer screening data. Biometrics 43: 657–669, 1987

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Day NE, Walter SD, Tabár L, Fagerberg CJG, Collette HJA: The sensitivity and lead time of breast cancer screening: a comparison of the results of different studies. In: Day N, Miller A (eds) Screening for Breast Cancer. Hans Huber Publishers, Toronto, 1988, pp 105–109

    Google Scholar 

  19. Van Oortmarssen GJ, Habbema JDF, Lubbe TN, van der Maas PJ: A model-based analysis of the HIP project for breast cancer screening. Int J Cancer 46: 207–213, 1990

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Paci E, Duffi SW: Modelling the analysis of breast cancer screening programmes: sensitivity, lead time and predictive value in the Florence district programme (1975–1986). Int J Epidemiol 20: 852–858, 1991

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Tabár L, Fagerberg G, Duffy SW, Day NE, Gad A, Gröntoft O: Update of the Swedish two-county program of mammographic screening for breast cancer. Radiol Clin N Am 30: 187–210, 1992

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Van Oortmarssen GJ, Habbema JDF, van der Maas PJ, de Koning HJ, Collette HJA, Verbeek ALM, Geerts AT, Lubbe KTN: A model for breast cancer screening. Cancer 66: 1601–1612, 1990

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Peeters PHM, Verbeek ALM, Straatman H, Holland R, Hendriks JHCL, Mravunac M, Rothengatter C, van Dijk-Milatz A, Werre JM: Evaluation of overdiagnosis of breast cancer screening with mammography. Results of the Nijmegen programme. Int J Epidemiol 18: 295–299, 1989

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Grove JS, Goodman MJ, Gilbert FI, Low G: Estimating the sensitivity of breast cancer screening — Experience with the Honolulu BCDDP data. Breast Cancer Res Treat 18: S97-S101, 1991

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Moskowitz M: Breast cancer: Age-specific growth rates and screening strategies. Radiology 161: 37–41, 1986

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Peer, P.G., Verbeek, A.L., Straatman, H. et al. Age-specific sensitivities of mammographic screening for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Tr 38, 153–160 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01806669

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01806669

Key words

Navigation