ArticleAnnals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology2012
Effect of protocol-related variables and women's characteristics on the cumulative false-positive risk in breast cancer screening.
Article in Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Personalized breast cancer screening strategies: A systematic review and quality assessment.PloS one · 2019Pooled it
- Prevalence and correlates of false-positive results after 3-D screening mammography among uninsured women in a community outreach program.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Screening breast magnetic resonance imaging in women with hormone replacement therapy.European journal of medical research · 2018Article
- Cumulative risk of breast cancer screening outcomes according to the presence of previous benign breast disease and family history of breast cancer: supporting personalised screening.British journal of cancer · 2017Article
- Double versus single reading of mammograms in a breast cancer screening programme: a cost-consequence analysis.European radiology · 2016Article
- Is the false-positive rate in mammography in North America too high?The British journal of radiology · 2016Review
- Cumulative risk of false positive test in relation to breast symptoms in mammography screening: a historical prospective cohort study.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2016Article
- Cross-national comparison of screening mammography accuracy measures in U.S., Norway, and Spain.European radiology · 2016Article
- Risk of breast cancer after false-positive results in mammographic screening.Cancer medicine · 2016Article
- Comparison of cumulative false-positive risk of screening mammography in the United States and Denmark.Cancer epidemiology · 2015Article
- Cost-effectiveness and harm-benefit analyses of risk-based screening strategies for breast cancer.PloS one · 2014Article
- Re-attendance after false-positive screening mammography: a population-based study in the Netherlands.British journal of cancer · 2013Article
- Impact of intermediate mammography assessment on the likelihood of false-positive results in breast cancer screening programmes.European radiology · 2012Article
- Differences in radiological patterns, tumour characteristics and diagnostic precision between digital mammography and screen-film mammography in four breast cancer screening programmes in Spain.European radiology · 2011Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReducing the false-positive risk in breast cancer screening is important. We examined how the screening-protocol and women's characteristics affect the cumulative false-positive risk.
methodsThis is a retrospective cohort study of 1,565,364 women aged 45-69 years who underwent 4,739,498 screening mammograms from 1990 to 2006. Multilevel discrete hazard models were used to estimate the cumulative false-positive risk over 10 sequential mammograms under different risk scenarios.
resultsThe factors affecting the false-positive risk for any procedure and for invasive procedures were double mammogram reading [odds ratio (OR)=2.06 and 4.44, respectively], two mammographic views (OR=0.77 and 1.56, respectively), digital mammography (OR=0.83 for invasive procedures), premenopausal status (OR=1.31 and 1.22, respectively), use of hormone replacement therapy (OR=1.03 and 0.84, respectively), previous invasive procedures (OR=1.52 and 2.00, respectively), and a familial history of breast cancer (OR=1.18 and 1.21, respectively). The cumulative false-positive risk for women who started screening at age 50-51 was 20.39% [95% confidence interval (CI) 20.02-20.76], ranging from 51.43% to 7.47% in the highest and lowest risk profiles, respectively. The cumulative risk for invasive procedures was 1.76% (95% CI 1.66-1.87), ranging from 12.02% to 1.58%.
conclusionsThe cumulative false-positive risk varied widely depending on the factors studied. These findings are relevant to provide women with accurate information and to improve the effectiveness of screening programs.
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.