ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2015
Benefits and harms of mammography screening after age 74 years: model estimates of overdiagnosis.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Health benefits and harms of mammography screening in older women (75+ years)-a systematic review.British journal of cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Systematic review on women's values and preferences concerning breast cancer screening and diagnostic services.Psycho-oncology · 2019Pooled it
- Surveillance mammography in older women-should we press on?Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
- Mathematical Modeling to Address Questions in Breast Cancer Screening: An Overview of the Breast Cancer Models of the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network.Journal of breast imaging · 2025Review
- Estimating Breast Cancer Overdiagnosis After Screening Mammography Among Older Women in the United States.Annals of internal medicine · 2023Article
- Assessing overdiagnosis of fecal immunological test screening for colorectal cancer with a digital twin approach.NPJ digital medicine · 2023Article
- The Landmark Series-Addressing Disparities in Breast Cancer Screening: New Recommendations for Black Women.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Review
- Ageing and cancer: a research gap to fill.Molecular oncology · 2022Review
- Breast Cancer in the Elderly: An Observational Study Investigating Compliance of Screening Mammography in an Underserved Community.World journal of oncology · 2021Article
- Using Risk Stratification to Optimize Mammography Screening in Chinese Women.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2021Article
- Primary care provider perspectives on screening mammography in older women: A qualitative study.Preventive medicine reports · 2021Article
- Which type of cancer is detected in breast screening programs? Review of the literature with focus on the most frequent histological features.Pathologica · 2021Review
- A Panel of Tumor-associated Autoantibodies for the Detection of Early-stage Breast Cancer.Journal of Cancer · 2021Article
- Cancer Screening in Older Adults: Individualized Decision-Making and Communication Strategies.The Medical clinics of North America · 2020Review
- Review
- Cancer Screening Among Older Adults: a Geriatrician's Perspective on Breast, Cervical, Colon, Prostate, and Lung Cancer Screening.Current oncology reports · 2020Review
- Benefits and Harms of Mammography Screening for Women With Down Syndrome: a Collaborative Modeling Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2019Article
- Introduction to the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) Breast Cancer Models.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2018Article
- Modeling Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS): An Overview of CISNET Model Approaches.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2018Article
- Testing Behavior Change Techniques to Encourage Primary Care Physicians to Access Cancer Screening Audit and Feedback Reports: Protocol for a Factorial Randomized Experiment of Email Content.JMIR research protocols · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to quantify the benefits and harms of mammography screening after age 74 years, focusing on the amount of overdiagnosis of invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).
methodsThree well-established microsimulation models were used to simulate a cohort of American women born in 1960. All women received biennial screening starting at age 50 years with cessation ages varying from 74 up to 96 years. We estimated the number of life-years gained (LYG), quality-adjusted life-years, breast cancer deaths averted, false-positives, and overdiagnosed women per 1000 screens.
resultsThe models predicted that there were 7.8 to 11.4 LYG per 1000 screens at age 74 years (range across models), decreasing to 4.8 to 7.8 LYG per 1000 screens at age 80 years, and 1.4 to 2.4 LYG per 1000 screens at age 90 years. When adjusted for quality-of-life decrements, the LYG decreased by 5% to 13% at age 74 years and 11% to 22% at age 80 years. At age 90 to 92 years, all LYG were counterbalanced by a loss in quality-of-life, mainly because of the increasing number of overdiagnosed breast cancers per 1000 screens: 1.2 to 5.0 at age 74 years, 1.8 to 6.0 at age 80 years, and 3.7 to 7.5 at age 90 years. The age at which harms began to outweigh benefits shifted to a younger age when larger or longer utility losses because of a breast cancer diagnosis were assumed.
conclusionThe balance between screening benefits and harms becomes less favorable after age 74 years. At age 90 years, harms outweigh benefits, largely as a consequence of overdiagnosis. This age was the same across the three models, despite important model differences in assumptions on DCIS.
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.