ArticleJAMA oncology2015
Breast Tumor Prognostic Characteristics and Biennial vs Annual Mammography, Age, and Menopausal Status.
Article in JAMA oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 4 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
42 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Benefits and harms of annual, biennial, or triennial breast cancer mammography screening for women at average risk of breast cancer: a systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC).British journal of cancer · 2022Pooled it
- [S3 guideline breast cancer: update on early detection, and mammography screening].Der Radiologe · 2019Guideline
- Guideline
- Investigation of the effectiveness of cooling spray on mammography comfort.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Advanced Versus Invasive Breast Cancer Risk in a Screening Population: Implications for Risk-based Prevention and Screening Strategies.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Patient Preference and Adherence in Mammography Screening: A Narrative Review.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Review
- Thirty years of population-based breast cancer screening in Iceland: a comparison of quality indicators and tumour characteristics between women aged 40-49 and 50-69 years.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2025Article
- Developing a website to help women aged 55 + incorporate risk in decision-making about breast cancer screening and prevention medications.Patient education and counseling · 2025Article
- Changes to the US Preventive Services Task Force Screening Guidelines and Incidence of Breast Cancer.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Breast Cancer Screening Interval: Effect on Rate of Late-Stage Disease at Diagnosis and Overall Survival.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024Article
- Response to the New USPSTF Recommendations on Breast Cancer Screening: Shared Decision-Making is the Cornerstone of Person-Centered Care.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2024Article
- Trends in breast, colon, pancreatic, and uterine cancers in women during the COVID-19 pandemic in North Carolina.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Oncotype DX in Breast Cancer Management: Insights and Outcomes From the United Arab Emirates.Cureus · 2024Article
- Patient counseling for breast cancer screening: Taking changes to USPSTF recommendations into account.OBG management · 2023Article
- Impact of Breast Cancer Screening on 10-Year Net Survival in Canadian Women Age 40-49 Years.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023Article
- Recommendations for the Screening of Breast Cancer of the Brazilian College of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Brazilian Society of Mastology and Brazilian Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Association.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2023Article
- Increased breast cancer mortality due to treatment delay and needle biopsy type: a retrospective analysis of SEER-medicare.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2023Article
- Cumulative 6-Year Risk of Screen-Detected Ductal Carcinoma In Situ by Screening Frequency.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Misinformation and Facts about Breast Cancer Screening.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
importanceScreening mammography intervals remain under debate in the United States.
objectiveTo compare the proportion of breast cancers with less vs more favorable prognostic characteristics in women screening annually vs biennially by age, menopausal status, and postmenopausal hormone therapy (HT) use. DESIGN, SETTING, AND
participantsThis was a study of a prospective cohort from 1996 to 2012 at Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium facilities. A total of 15,440 women ages 40 to 85 years with breast cancer diagnosed within 1 year of an annual or within 2 years of a biennial screening mammogram. EXPOSURES: We updated previous analyses by using narrower intervals for defining annual (11-14 months) and biennial (23-26 months) screening. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: We defined less favorable prognostic characteristics as tumors that were stage IIB or higher, size greater than 15 mm, positive nodes, and any 1 or more of these characteristics. We used log-binomial regression to model the proportion of breast cancers with less favorable characteristics following a biennial vs annual screen by 10-year age groups and by menopausal status and current postmenopausal HT use.
resultsAmong 15,440 women with breast cancer, most were 50 years or older (13,182 [85.4%]), white (12,063 [78.1%]), and postmenopausal (9823 [63.6%]). Among 2027 premenopausal women (13.1%), biennial screeners had higher proportions of tumors that were stage IIB or higher (relative risk [RR], 1.28 [95% CI, 1.01-1.63]; P=.04), size greater than 15 mm (RR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.07-1.37]; P=.002), and with any less favorable prognostic characteristic (RR, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.00-1.22]; P=.047) compared with annual screeners. Among women currently taking postmenopausal HT, biennial screeners tended to have tumors with less favorable prognostic characteristics compared with annual screeners; however, 95% CIs were wide, and differences were not statistically significant (for stage 2B+, RR, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.89-1.47], P=.29; size>15 mm, RR, 1.13 [95% CI, 0.98-1.31], P=.09; node positive, RR, 1.18 [95% CI, 0.98-1.42], P=.09; any less favorable characteristic, RR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.00-1.25], P=.053). The proportions of tumors with less favorable prognostic characteristics were not significantly larger for biennial vs annual screeners among postmenopausal women not taking HT (eg, any characteristic: RR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.95-1.12]; P=.45), postmenopausal HT users after subdividing by type of hormone use (eg, any characteristic: estrogen+progestogen users, RR, 1.16 [95% CI, 0.91-1.47]; P=.22; estrogen-only users, RR, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.94-1.37]; P=.18), or any 10-year age group (eg, any characteristic: ages 40-49 years, RR, .1.04 [95% CI, 0.94-1.14]; P=.48; ages 50-59 years, RR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.94-1.12]; P=.58; ages 60-69 years, RR, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.97-1.19]; P=.18; ages 70-85 years, RR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.94-1.18]; P=.35). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Premenopausal women diagnosed as having breast cancer following biennial vs annual screening mammography are more likely to have tumors with less favorable prognostic characteristics. Postmenopausal women not using HT who are diagnosed as having breast cancer following a biennial or annual screen have similar proportions of tumors with less favorable prognostic characteristics.
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.