Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Is clinical breast examination effective in Japan? Consideration from the age-specific performance of breast cancer screening combining mammography with clinical breast examination

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

There is controversy about the value of clinical breast examination (CBE) in breast cancer screening programs that include mammography.

Methods

In Fukui Prefecture, a screening combining mammography with CBE was employed on 62,447 women from 2004 to 2009. We examined the sensitivity and specificity of mammography alone, and mammography and CBE together for each age group (40–49, 50–59, 60–69, and 70–79).

Results

167 breast cancers and 49 false-negative cancers were detected during 5 years. For the combined screening, the sensitivities were 73.1, 74.1, 78.3, and 86.5 %, and the specificities were 83.8, 87.5, 89.8, and 90.9 % in the groups of 40–49, 50–59, 60–69, and 70–79 years, respectively. In the mammography-specific analysis, sensitivity decreased to 69.8 % (−3.3 %), 66.7 % (−7.7 %), 77.3 % (−1.0 %), and 83.8 % (−2.7 %) in the groups of 40–49, 50–59, 60–69, and 70–79 years, respectively. There were greater reductions in the groups of 40–49 and 50–59 years than in those of 60–69 and 70–79 years, but there was no statistically significant decrease. Specificity generally increased with increasing age and there was a significant improvement in specificity among all age groups, except that of 70–79 years.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that there is a trade-off between sensitivity and specificity associated with CBE added to mammography. This tendency is greater in those 40–50 years of age than in those 60–70 years of age. We consider that CBE may be omitted from breast cancer screening among women aged 60 and 70 years. Furthermore, another modality to complement mammography screening in younger Japanese women is expected.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nystrom L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, Frisell J, Nordenskjold B, Rutqvist LE. Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet. 2002;359:909–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tabar L, Fagerberg CJ, Gad A, Baldetorp L, Holmberg LH, Grontoft O, et al. Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography. Randomised trial from the Breast Cancer Screening Working Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Lancet. 1985;8433:829–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Frisell J, Lidbrink E, Hellstrom L, Rutqvist LE. Followup after 11 years update of mortality results in the Stockholm mammographic screening trial. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1997;45:263–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bjurstam N, Björneld L, Warwick J, Sala E, Duffy SW, Nyström L, et al. The Gothenburg breast screening trial. Cancer. 2003;97:2387–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Miller AB, To T, Baines CJ, Wall C. Canadian National Breast Screening Study-2: 13-year results of a randomized trial in women aged 50–59 years. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:1490–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Miller AB, To T, Baines CJ, Wall C. The Canadian National Breast Screening Study-1: breast cancer mortality after 11 to 16 years of follow-up. A randomized screening trial of mammography in women age 40 to 49 years. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:305–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Moss SM, Cuckle H, Evans A, Johns L, Waller M, Bobrow L, Trial Management Group. Effect of mammographic screening from age 40 years on breast cancer mortality at 10 years’ follow-up: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2006;36:2053–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Habbema JD, van Oortmarssen GJ, van Putten DJ, Lubbe JT, van der Maas PJ. Age-specific reduction in breast cancer mortality by screening: an analysis of the results of the Health Insurance Plan of Greater New York study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1986;77:317–32.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Alexander FE, Anderson TJ, Brown HK, Forrest AP, Hepburn W, Kirkpatrick AE, et al. 14 years of follow-up from the Edinburgh randomised trial of breast-cancer screening. Lancet. 1999;353:1903–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kanemura S, Tsuji I, Ohuchi N, Takei H, Yokoe T, Koibuchi Y, et al. A case control study on the effectiveness of breast cancer screening by clinical breast examination in Japan. Jpn J Cancer Res. 1999;6:607–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Sasa M, Morimoto T, Yamaguchi T, Kondo H, Kuroda R, Mitsuyama M, et al. Breast cancer screening by palpation and mammography: simultaneous or consecutive examination? J Jpn Assoc Breast Cancer Screen. 1999;8:11–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:716–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Suzuki A, Kuriyama S, Kawai M, Amari M, Takeda M, Ishida T, et al. Age-specific interval breast cancers in Japan: estimation of the proper sensitivity of screening using a population-based cancer registry. Cancer Sci. 2008;99:2264–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Morimoto T, Tangoku A, Yamakawa T, Tsuruno M, Takashima S. Promotion of quality-controlled mammography alone as a screening modality in Japan. Breast Cancer 2012; 23 (published online).

  16. Barton MB, Harris R, Fletcher SW. The rational clinical examination. Does this patient have breast cancer? The screening clinical breast examination: should it be done? How? JAMA. 1999;282:1270–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Oestreicher N, Lehman CD, Seger DJ, Buist DS, White E. The incremental contribution of clinical breast examination to invasive cancer detection in a mammography screening program. AJR. 2005;184:428–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Rosenberg RD, Hunt WC, Williamson MR, Gilliland FD, Wiest PW, Kelsey CA, Key CR, Linver MN. Effect of age, breast density, ethnicity, and estrogen replacement therapy on screening mammographic sensitivity and cancer stage at diagnosis: review of 183, 134 screening mammograms in Albuquerque. New Mexico. Radiology. 1998;209:511–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Peer PG, Verbeek AL, Straatman H, Hendriks JH, Holland R. Age-specific sensitivities of mammographic screening for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1996;38:153–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Chiarelli AM, Majpruz V, Brown P, Thériault M, Shumak R, Mai V. The contribution of clinical breast examination to the accuracy of breast screening. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:1236–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ohuchi N, Ishida T, Kawai M, Narikawa Y, Yamamoto S, Sobue T. Randomized controlled trial on effectiveness of ultrasonography screening for breast cancer in women aged 40–49 (J-START): research design. JPN J Clin Oncol. 2011;41:275–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Caldarella A, Puliti D, Crocetti E, Bianchi S, Vezzosi V, Apicella P. Biological characteristics of interval cancers: a role for biomarkers in the breast cancer screening. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2013;139:181–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors indicate no conflict of interest in this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Fukui Prefectural Hospital, Yotsui 2-8-1, Fukui, 910-8526, Japan

    Kouji Ohta

  2. Department of Surgery, Fukui Saiseikai Hospital, Fukui, Japan

    Yoshio Kasahara

  3. Department of Surgery, Fukui Red Cross Hospital, Fukui, Japan

    Fumie Tanaka

  4. Department of Surgery 1, Fukui University Graduate School of Medicine, Fukui, Japan

    Hiroyuki Maeda

Authors
  1. Kouji Ohta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yoshio Kasahara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fumie Tanaka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hiroyuki Maeda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kouji Ohta.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ohta, K., Kasahara, Y., Tanaka, F. et al. Is clinical breast examination effective in Japan? Consideration from the age-specific performance of breast cancer screening combining mammography with clinical breast examination. Breast Cancer 23, 183–189 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-014-0544-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-014-0544-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation