Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30887204›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2019

Annual mammography at age 45-49 years and biennial mammography at age 50-69 years: comparing performance measures in an organised screening setting.

Lauro Bucchi, Alessandra Ravaioli, Flavia Baldacchini, Orietta Giuliani, Silvia Mancini, Rosa Vattiato, Fabio Falcini, Paolo Giorgi Rossi, Cinzia Campari, Debora Canuti and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Lauro BucchiRomagna Cancer Registry, Romagna Cancer Institute (Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori, IRST, IRCCS), Meldola, Forlì, Italy. lauro.bucchi@irst.emr.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6771-8119
Alessandra RavaioliRomagna Cancer Registry, Romagna Cancer Institute (Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori, IRST, IRCCS), Meldola, Forlì, Italy.
Flavia BaldacchiniRomagna Cancer Registry, Romagna Cancer Institute (Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori, IRST, IRCCS), Meldola, Forlì, Italy.
Orietta GiulianiRomagna Cancer Registry, Romagna Cancer Institute (Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori, IRST, IRCCS), Meldola, Forlì, Italy.
Silvia ManciniRomagna Cancer Registry, Romagna Cancer Institute (Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori, IRST, IRCCS), Meldola, Forlì, Italy.
Rosa VattiatoRomagna Cancer Registry, Romagna Cancer Institute (Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori, IRST, IRCCS), Meldola, Forlì, Italy.
Fabio FalciniRomagna Cancer Registry, Romagna Cancer Institute (Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori, IRST, IRCCS), Meldola, Forlì, Italy.
Paolo Giorgi RossiEpidemiology Unit, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale - IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Cinzia CampariCancer Screening Unit, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale - IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Debora CanutiLocal Health Authority, Rimini, Italy.
Enza Di FeliceDepartment of Health, Regional Administration, Emilia-Romagna Region, Bologna, Italy.
Priscilla Sassoli de BianchiDepartment of Health, Regional Administration, Emilia-Romagna Region, Bologna, Italy.
Stefano FerrettiUniversity of Ferrara and Local Health Authority, Ferrara, Italy.
Nicoletta BertozziDepartment of Health, Regional Administration, Emilia-Romagna Region, Bologna, Italy.
Emilia-Romagna Region Workgroup for Mammography Screening Evaluation

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the results of 5 years of annual mammography screening at age 45-49 with the results of 5 years of biennial screening at age 50-54 and 55-69.

methodsIn an Italian screening programme, data from 1,465,335 mammograms were analysed. Recall rates, invasive assessment rates, surgical biopsy (including excisional biopsy and definitive surgical treatment) rates, and cancer detection rates were calculated for the first screen (first) and, cumulatively, for the second and subsequent screens (second+).

resultsThe rate ratios between younger women and the two groups of older ones were (in parentheses, original figures per 1000 mammograms if not otherwise specified): recall rate: first 1.11 (103.6 vs. 93.5) and 1.11 (vs. 93.2), second+ 2.10 (208.9 vs. 99.7) and 2.77 (vs. 75.5); invasive assessment rate: first 0.94 (23.0 vs. 24.5) and 0.94 (vs. 24.6), second+ 1.63 (35.8 vs. 22.0) and 1.56 (vs. 23.0); surgical biopsy rate: first 0.68 (5.9 vs. 8.6) and 0.45 (vs. 13.2), second+ 1.35 (11.5 vs. 8.5) and 0.88 (vs. 13.0); total detection rate: first 0.63 (4.3 vs. 6.7) and 0.37 (vs. 11.7), second+ 1.30 (8.9 vs. 6.8) and 0.74 (vs. 12.0); total positive predictive value of surgical biopsy: first 0.93 (72.8% vs. 78.0%) and 0.82 (vs. 88.9%), second+ 0.96 (77.2% vs. 80.5%) and 0.83 (vs. 92.7%).

conclusionYounger women experienced two to threefold higher cumulative recall rates at second+ screens and limited differences in surgical biopsy rate. Albeit encouraging, these results must be completed with further investigation, especially on interval cancer incidence. KEY POINTS: • At repeated screens, cumulative recall rate was two- to threefold higher for younger women. • Differences in cumulative surgical referral and surgical biopsy rates were moderate. • Differences in positive predictive value of surgical biopsy were particularly small.

Indexed as

AgedAge FactorsBiopsyBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Intraductal, NoninfiltratingEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansItalyMammographyMass ScreeningMiddle AgedNeoplasm InvasivenessReferral and ConsultationBiopsyBreast neoplasmsMammographyMass screeningPremenopause

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.