ArticleBritish journal of cancer2005
Mammographic screening before age 50 years in the UK: comparison of the radiation risks with the mortality benefits.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 112 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exposure to low-dose radiation and the risk of breast cancer among women with a familial or genetic predisposition: a meta-analysis.European radiology · 2010Pooled it
- Systematic review: surveillance for breast cancer in women treated with chest radiation for childhood, adolescent, or young adult cancer.Annals of internal medicine · 2010Pooled it
- Article
- Review
- Health Care Accessibility and Breast Cancer Mortality in Europe.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
- Radiomic Applications on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis of BI-RADS Category 4 Calcifications Sent for Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Detecting Vasodilation as Potential Diagnostic Biomarker in Breast Cancer Using Deep Learning-Driven Thermomics.Biosensors · 2020Article
- Selection of a Novel Aptamer Against Vitronectin Using Capillary Electrophoresis and Next Generation Sequencing.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2016Article
- Radiation risk of breast screening in England with digital mammography.The British journal of radiology · 2016Article
- Thermal distribution analysis of three-dimensional tumor-embedded breast models with different breast density compositions.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2016Article
- Breast cancer: Doubtful health benefit of screening from 40 years of age.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2015Article
- Molecular breast imaging: an emerging modality for breast cancer screening.Breast cancer management · 2015Article
- Comparison of clinicopathological findings among patients whose mammography results were classified as category 4 subgroups of the BI-RADS.Northern clinics of Istanbul · 2014Article
- Breast cancer screening: the questions answered.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2012Review
- Characterization of the homogeneous tissue mixture approximation in breast imaging dosimetry.Medical physics · 2012Article
- Breast and ovarian cancer screening of non-carriers from BRCA1/2 mutation-positive families: 2-year follow-up of cohorts from France and Quebec.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2011Article
- Population-based mammography screening below age 50: balancing radiation-induced vs prevented breast cancer deaths.British journal of cancer · 2011Article
- Are there racial/ethnic disparities among women younger than 40 undergoing mammography?Breast cancer research and treatment · 2010Article
- Performance of first mammography examination in women younger than 40 years.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2010Article
- Cancer screening with digital mammography for women at average risk for breast cancer, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for women at high risk: an evidence-based analysis.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mammographic screening before age 50 years is less effective than at older ages and the associated radiation risks are higher. We estimated how many breast cancer deaths could be caused and how many could be prevented by a decade of annual two-view mammographic screening starting at ages 20, 30 and 40 years, respectively, in the UK; for all women, and for women with first-degree relatives affected with breast cancer. We extrapolated from a radiation risk model to estimate the number of radiation-induced breast cancer deaths, and used results from randomised trials, which suggest a reduction in breast cancer mortality of 10-20% in women invited to screening before age 50 years, to estimate the number of deaths that could be prevented. The net change in breast cancer deaths was defined as the number of radiation-induced deaths minus the number of prevented deaths. For all women, assuming a reduction in mortality from screening of 20%, a decade of annual screening was estimated to induce more deaths than it prevents if started at age 20 years and at age 30 years (net increase = 0.86 and 0.37 breast cancer deaths, respectively, per 1000 women screened). The corresponding estimate for screening starting at age 40 years was a net decrease of 0.46 deaths/1000 women screened and a zero net change assuming a 10% mortality reduction. Results for women with first-degree relatives with breast cancer were generally in the same direction but, because their background incidence rates are higher, the net increases or decreases were greater. In conclusion, our estimates suggest that a decade of annual two-view mammographic screening before age 40 years would result in a net increase in breast cancer deaths, and that starting at age 40 years could result in a material net decrease only if breast cancer mortality is reduced by about 20% or more in women screened. Although these calculations were based on a number of uncertain parameters, in general, the conclusions were not altered when these parameters were varied within a feasible range.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.