SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2009
Screening for breast cancer with mammography.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 81 papers, 7 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
81 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 192 citations in OpenAlex.
- Breast cancer screening in developing countries.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2017Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of breast cancer mortality benefit and overdiagnosis adjusted for adherence: improving information on the effects of attending screening mammography.British journal of cancer · 2016Pooled it
- Is there excess mortality in women screened with mammography: a meta-analysis of non-breast cancer mortality.Trials · 2013Pooled it
- Screening for breast cancer with mammography.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Time lag to benefit after screening for breast and colorectal cancer: meta-analysis of survival data from the United States, Sweden, United Kingdom, and Denmark.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2013Pooled it
- The favorable impact of PIK3CA mutations on survival: an analysis of 2587 patients with breast cancer.Chinese journal of cancer · 2012Pooled it
- [Recommendations for breast cancer screening with mammography in the medium risk population: update of PAPPS 2012].Atencion primaria · 2012Guideline
- Results from 22 years of Followup in the Göteborg Randomized Population-Based Prostate Cancer Screening Trial.The Journal of urology · 2022Trial
- "I Was Trying to Do the Maths": Exploring the Impact of Risk Communication in Discrete Choice Experiments.The patient · 2019Trial
- Intraoperative Ultrasound Guidance in Breast-Conserving Surgery Improves Cosmetic Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction: Results of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (COBALT).Annals of surgical oncology · 2016Trial
- Standardisation of information submitted to an endpoint committee for cause of death assignment in a cancer screening trial – lessons learnt from CAP (Cluster randomised triAl of PSA testing for Prostate cancer).BMC medical research methodology · 2015Trial
- Mortality results from the Göteborg randomised population-based prostate-cancer screening trial.The Lancet. Oncology · 2010Trial
- WISDOM Randomized Trial Comparing Risk-Based Versus Annual Breast Cancer Screening: Study Cohort Characteristics and Design.Research square · 2025Article
- Article
- Pancreatic cancer: from early detection to personalized treatment approaches.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Review
- A plea for more careful scholarship in reviewing evidence: the case of mammographic screening.BJR open · 2023Review
- A Distributed Cancer Care Model with a Technology-Driven Hub-and-Spoke and further Spoke Hierarchy: Findings from a Pilot Implementation Programme in Kerala, India.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2022Article
- Efficient Denoising Framework for Mammogram Images with a New Impulse Detector and Non-Local Means.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2020Article
- Breast cancer incidence, mortality and mortality-to-incidence ratio (MIR) are associated with human development, 1990-2016: evidence from Global Burden of Disease Study 2016.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2019Article
- Breast Cancer Screening Paved with Good Intentions: Application of the Information-Motivation-Behavioral Skills Model to Racial/Ethnic Minority Women.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2017Article
21 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution 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 (November 2008). 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
resultsEight eligible trials were identified. We excluded a biased trial and included 600,000 women in the analyses. Three trials with adequate randomisation did not show a significant reduction in breast cancer mortality at 13 years (relative risk (RR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 1.02); four trials with suboptimal randomisation showed a significant reduction in breast cancer mortality with an RR of 0.75 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.83). The RR for all seven trials combined was 0.81 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.87). 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. The trials with adequate randomisation did not find an effect of screening on cancer mortality, including breast cancer, after 10 years (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.10) or on all-cause mortality after 13 years (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.03).Numbers of lumpectomies and mastectomies were significantly larger in the screened groups (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.42) for the two adequately randomised trials that measured this outcome; the use of radiotherapy was similarly increased. AUTHORS'
conclusionsScreening is likely to reduce breast cancer mortality. As the effect was lowest in the adequately randomised trials, a reasonable estimate is a 15% reduction corresponding to an absolute risk reduction of 0.05%. Screening led to 30% overdiagnosis and overtreatment, 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 and 10 healthy women, who would not have been diagnosed if there had not been screening, will be treated unnecessarily. Furthermore, more than 200 women will experience important psychological distress for many months because of false positive findings. It is thus not clear whether screening does more good than harm. To help ensure that the women are fully informed of both benefits and harms before they decide whether or not to attend screening, we have written an evidence-based leaflet for lay people that is available in several languages on www.cochrane.dk.
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.