SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2006
Screening for breast cancer with mammography.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03077191 (Toxicity and Outcome of Whole Breast Hypofractionated Radiotherapy Without Boost), which is not on this map. Cited by 90 papers, 10 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.
Toxicity and Outcome of Whole Breast Hypofractionated Radiotherapy Without Boost: Results of a Homogeneous Single Institution Experience
Who cites it
90 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 259 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Political Economy on Population Health: A Systematic Review of Reviews.American journal of public health · 2019Pooled it
- Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Screening for breast cancer with mammography.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Comparative evaluation of digital mammography and film mammography: systematic review and meta-analysis.Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina · 2011Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Overdiagnosis in publicly organised mammography screening programmes: systematic review of incidence trends.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2009Pooled it
- 2008 update of the guideline: early detection of breast cancer in Germany.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2009Guideline
- Antenatal psychosocial assessment for reducing perinatal mental health morbidity.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2008Pooled it
- Interventions for relieving the pain and discomfort of screening mammography.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2008Pooled it
- Regular self-examination or clinical examination for early detection of breast cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2003Pooled it
- Now, later of never: multicenter randomized controlled trial call--is surgery necessary after atypical breast core biopsy results in mammographic screening settings?International journal of surgical oncology · 2015Trial
- Preventing the acute skin side effects in patients treated with radiotherapy for breast cancer: the use of corneometry in order to evaluate the protective effect of moisturizing creams.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2013Trial
- What is the point: will screening mammography save my life?BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2009Trial
- WISDOM randomized trial comparing risk-based versus annual breast cancer screening: study cohort characteristics and design.NPJ breast cancer · 2026Article
- Evaluation and feasibility of diagnostic heatflow imaging in patients with palpable breast lesions: a pilot study.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Article
- A plea for more careful scholarship in reviewing evidence: the case of mammographic screening.BJR open · 2023Review
- Impact of artificial intelligence in breast cancer screening with mammography.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2022Article
- Article
- Breast Cancer Detection-A Synopsis of Conventional Modalities and the Potential Role of Microwave Imaging.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Observational
30 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA variety of estimates of the benefits and harms of mammographic screening for breast cancer have been published and national policies vary.
objectivesTo assess the effect of screening for breast cancer with mammography on mortality and morbidity. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched PubMed (June 2005). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing mammographic screening with no mammographic screening. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both authors independently extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. MAIN
resultsSeven completed and eligible trials involving half a million women were identified. We excluded a biased trial from analysis. Two trials with adequate randomisation did not show a significant reduction in breast cancer mortality, relative risk (RR) 0.93 (95% confidence interval 0.80 to 1.09) at 13 years; four trials with suboptimal randomisation showed a significant reduction in breast cancer mortality, RR 0.75 (0.67 to 0.83) (P = 0.02 for difference between the two estimates). RR for all six trials combined was 0.80 (0.73 to 0.88). The two trials with adequate randomisation did not find an effect of screening on cancer mortality, including breast cancer, RR 1.02 (0.95 to 1.10) after 10 years, or on all-cause mortality, RR 1.00 (0.96 to 1.04) after 13 years. We found that breast cancer mortality was an unreliable outcome that was biased in favour of screening, mainly because of differential misclassification of cause of death. Numbers of lumpectomies and mastectomies were significantly larger in the screened groups, RR 1.31 (1.22 to 1.42) for the two adequately randomised trials; the use of radiotherapy was similarly increased. AUTHORS'
conclusionsScreening likely reduces breast cancer mortality. Based on all trials, the reduction is 20%, but as the effect is lower in the highest quality trials, a more reasonable estimate is a 15% relative risk reduction. Based on the risk level of women in these trials, the absolute risk reduction was 0.05%. Screening also leads to overdiagnosis and overtreatment, with an estimated 30% increase, or an absolute risk increase of 0.5%. This means that for every 2000 women invited for screening throughout 10 years, one will have her life prolonged. In addition, 10 healthy women, who would not have been diagnosed if there had not been screening, will be diagnosed as breast cancer patients and will be treated unnecessarily. It is thus not clear whether screening does more good than harm. Women invited to screening should be fully informed of both benefits and harms.
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.