ArticleAnnals of internal medicine2016
Tailoring Breast Cancer Screening Intervals by Breast Density and Risk for Women Aged 50 Years or Older: Collaborative Modeling of Screening Outcomes.
Article in Annals of internal medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 82 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
82 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Health Economic Evaluations of Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: A Systematic Review Focusing on Methodology and Quality Assessment.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Pooled it
- Extending the Age Range in Mammography Screening: A Benefit-Risk Assessment from a Radiation Protection Perspective.RoFo : Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin · 2026Pooled 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
- Systematic Review of the Cost Effectiveness of Breast Cancer Prevention, Screening, and Treatment Interventions.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2020Pooled it
- Personalized breast cancer screening strategies: A systematic review and quality assessment.PloS one · 2019Pooled it
- Addition of ultrasound to mammography in the case of dense breast tissue: systematic review and meta-analysis.British journal of cancer · 2018Pooled it
- Simulation modeling for stratified breast cancer screening - a systematic review of cost and quality of life assumptions.BMC health services research · 2017Pooled it
- Trial
- Advanced Versus Invasive Breast Cancer Risk in a Screening Population: Implications for Risk-based Prevention and Screening Strategies.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Outcomes of Density-Targeted Supplemental Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Screening by Breast Cancer Risk: Long-Term Health and Economic Considerations.Annals of internal medicine · 2026Article
- Nurse-led risk-based primary healthcare intervention in midlife women's health management in Hong Kong: a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial protocol.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Five-Year Absolute Risk-Based and Age-Based Breast Cancer Screening in the US.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Effect of race and ethnicity on advanced breast cancer risk prediction model performance.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Improving preventive screening efficiency: A population-based model of age-specific mammographic density for breast Cancer detection in Saudi Arabia.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- A Systematic Review of the Cost-Effectiveness of Screening Modalities for Breast Cancer in European Countries.Cancers · 2025Review
- Breast cancer screening in women aged 75 and older: Insights from an aging region in Japan.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- Subgroups varying in risk and density highlight the potential for stratified breast cancer screening.European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) · 2025Article
- Women's preferences for testing to predict breast cancer risk - a discrete choice experiment.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Challenges and opportunities for Aotearoa/New Zealand's breast screening programme.Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand · 2025Review
- Current Strategies to Reducing Interval Breast Cancers: A Systematic Review.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2025Review
22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Biennial screening is generally recommended for average-risk women aged 50 to 74 years, but tailored screening may provide greater benefits. Objective: To estimate outcomes for various screening intervals after age 50 years based on breast density and risk for breast cancer. Design: Collaborative simulation modeling using national incidence, breast density, and screening performance data. Setting: United States. Patients: Women aged 50 years or older with various combinations of breast density and relative risk (RR) of 1.0, 1.3, 2.0, or 4.0. Intervention: Annual, biennial, or triennial digital mammography screening from ages 50 to 74 years (vs. no screening) and ages 65 to 74 years (vs. biennial digital mammography from ages 50 to 64 years). Measurements: Lifetime breast cancer deaths, life expectancy and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), false-positive mammograms, benign biopsy results, overdiagnosis, cost-effectiveness, and ratio of false-positive results to breast cancer deaths averted. Results: Screening benefits and overdiagnosis increase with breast density and RR. False-positive mammograms and benign results on biopsy decrease with increasing risk. Among women with fatty breasts or scattered fibroglandular density and an RR of 1.0 or 1.3, breast cancer deaths averted were similar for triennial versus biennial screening for both age groups (50 to 74 years, median of 3.4 to 5.1 vs. 4.1 to 6.5 deaths averted; 65 to 74 years, median of 1.5 to 2.1 vs. 1.8 to 2.6 deaths averted). Breast cancer deaths averted increased with annual versus biennial screening for women aged 50 to 74 years at all levels of breast density and an RR of 4.0, and those aged 65 to 74 years with heterogeneously or extremely dense breasts and an RR of 4.0. However, harms were almost 2-fold higher. Triennial screening for the average-risk subgroup and annual screening for the highest-risk subgroup cost less than $100 000 per QALY gained. Limitation: Models did not consider women younger than 50 years, those with an RR less than 1, or other imaging methods. Conclusion: Average-risk women with low breast density undergoing triennial screening and higher-risk women with high breast density receiving annual screening will maintain a similar or better balance of benefits and harms than average-risk women receiving biennial screening. Primary Funding Source: National Cancer Institute.
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.