Overdiagnosis in screening mammography in Denmark: population based cohort study

被引:68
作者
Njor, Sisse Helle [1 ]
Olsen, Anne Helene [2 ]
Blichert-Toft, Mogens [3 ]
Schwartz, Walter [4 ]
Vejborg, Ilse [5 ]
Lynge, Elsebeth [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Copenhagen, Dept Publ Hlth, DK-1014 Copenhagen K, Denmark
[2] Univ Tromso, Inst Community Med, Tromso, Norway
[3] Danish Breast Canc Cooperat Grp, DK-2100 Copenhagen O, Denmark
[4] Odense Univ Hosp, Mammog Screening Clin, DK-5000 Odense, Denmark
[5] Univ Copenhagen Hosp, Diagnost Ctr, DK-2100 Copenhagen O, Denmark
来源
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL | 2013年 / 346卷
关键词
BREAST-CANCER; NATURAL-HISTORY; FOLLOW-UP; TRIAL; OVERTREATMENT; PROGRAMS; SURVIVAL; TRENDS; END;
D O I
10.1136/bmj.f1064
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective To use data from two longstanding, population based screening programmes to study overdiagnosis in screening mammography. Design Population based cohort study. Setting Copenhagen municipality (from 1991) and Funen County (from 1993), Denmark. Participants 57 763 women targeted by organised screening, aged 56-69 when the screening programmes started, and followed up to 2009. Main outcome measures Overdiagnosis of breast cancer in women targeted by screening, assessed by relative risks compared with historical control groups from screening regions, national control groups from non-screening regions, and historical national control groups. Results In total, 3279 invasive breast carcinomas and ductal carcinomas in situ occurred. The start of screening led to prevalence peaks in breast cancer incidence: relative risk 2.06 (95% confidence interval 1.64 to 2.59) for Copenhagen and 1.84 (1.46 to 2.32) for Funen. During subsequent screening rounds, relative risks were slightly above unity: 1.04 (0.85 to 1.27) for Copenhagen and 1.14 (0.98 to 1.32) for Funen. A compensatory dip was seen after the end of invitation to screening: relative risk 0.80 (0.65 to 0.98) for Copenhagen and 0.67 (0.55 to 0.81) for Funen during the first four years. The relative risk of breast cancer accumulated over the entire follow-up period was 1.06 (0.90 to 1.25) for Copenhagen and 1.01 (0.93 to 1.10) for Funen. Relative risks for participants corrected for selection bias were estimated to be 1.08 for Copenhagen and 1.02 for Funen; for participants followed for at least eight years after the end of screening, they were 1.05 and 1.01. A pooled estimate gave 1.040 (0.99 to 1.09) for all targeted women and 1.023 (0.97 to 1.08) for targeted women followed for at least eight years after the end of screening. Conclusions On the basis of combined data from the two screening programmes, this study indicated that overdiagnosis most likely amounted to 2.3% (95% confidence interval -3% to 8%) in targeted women. Among participants, it was most likely 1-5%. At least eight years after the end of screening were needed to compensate for the excess incidence during screening.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]   Effects of study methods and biases on estimates of invasive breast cancer overdetection with mammography screening: a systematic review [J].
Biesheuvel, Corne ;
Barratt, Alexandra ;
Howard, Kirsten ;
Houssami, Nehmat ;
Irwig, Les .
LANCET ONCOLOGY, 2007, 8 (12) :1129-1138
[2]   EXTRA INCIDENCE CAUSED BY MAMMOGRAPHIC SCREENING [J].
BOER, R ;
WARMERDAM, P ;
DEKONING, H ;
VANOORTMARSSEN, G .
LANCET, 1994, 343 (8903) :979-979
[3]   Interpreting Overdiagnosis Estimates in Population-based Mammography Screening [J].
de Gelder, Rianne ;
Heijnsdijk, Eveline A. M. ;
van Ravesteyn, Nicolien T. ;
Fracheboud, Jacques ;
Draisma, Gerrit ;
de Koning, Harry J. .
EPIDEMIOLOGIC REVIEWS, 2011, 33 (01) :111-121
[4]   An estimate of overdiagnosis 15 years after the start of mammographic screening in Florence [J].
Donella, Puliti ;
Marco, Zappa ;
Guido, Miccinesi ;
Patrizia, Falini ;
Emanuele, Crocetti ;
Eugenio, Paci .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2009, 45 (18) :3166-3171
[5]   Complexities in the estimation of overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening [J].
Duffy, S. W. ;
Lynge, E. ;
Jonsson, H. ;
Ayyaz, S. ;
Olsen, A. H. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2008, 99 (07) :1176-1178
[6]   metan: fixed- and random-effects meta-analysis [J].
Harris, Ross J. ;
Bradburn, Michael J. ;
Deeks, Jonathan J. ;
Harbord, Roger M. ;
Altman, Douglas G. ;
Sterne, Jonathan A. C. .
STATA JOURNAL, 2008, 8 (01) :3-28
[7]   Do nonattenders in mammography screening programmes seek mammography elsewhere? [J].
Jensen, A ;
Olsen, AH ;
von Euler-Chelpin, M ;
Njor, SH ;
Vejborg, I ;
Lynge, E .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2005, 113 (03) :464-470
[8]  
Johnstone PAS, 2000, J SURG ONCOL, V73, P273, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9098(200004)73:4<273::AID-JSO15>3.0.CO
[9]  
2-H
[10]   Overdiagnosis in organised mammography screening in Denmark. A comparative study [J].
Jørgensen K.J. ;
Zahl P.-H. ;
Gøtzsche P.C. .
BMC Women's Health, 9 (1)