Effect of recall rate on earlier screen detection of breast cancers based on the dutch performance indicators

被引:78
作者
Otten, JDM
Karssemeijer, N
Hendriks, JHCL
Groenewoud, JH
Fracheboud, J
Verbeek, ALM
de Koning, HJ
Holland, R
机构
[1] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Med Ctr, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, NL-6500 HB Nijmegen, Netherlands
[2] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Dept Radiol, Med Ctr, Nijmegen, Netherlands
[3] Natl Expert & Training Ctr Breast Canc Screening, Nijmegen, Netherlands
[4] Univ Rotterdam, Med Ctr, Erasmus MC, Dept Publ Hlth, Rotterdam, Netherlands
关键词
D O I
10.1093/jnci/dji131
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background. The recall rate (i.e., the rate at which mammographically screened women are recalled for additional assessment) in the Dutch breast screening program (0.89% in 2000 for subsequent examinations) is the lowest worldwide, with possible consequences including higher rates of late-detected (i.e., "missed") interval and screen-detected cancers. To estimate the effect of changes in recall rate on earlier detection of cancers, we carried out a blinded review of interval and screen-detected cancers in the Dutch screening program. Methods: A total of 495 sets of screen-negative mammograms (prediagnostic mammogram and the immediate previous mammogram) were collected from women participating in the biennial Dutch screening program. Of these, 250 were from control subjects, and 245 were from women who were subsequently diagnosed with breast cancer (123 interval and 122 screen-detected cancers). These mammograms were read by 15 radiologists who specialize in screening mammography and were blinded to outcome. Mean detection sensitivities for different false-positive rates were calculated using a linear mixed model. These results were used to calculate the effect of recall rate adjustment on earlier detection of cancers and numbers of false-positives. Results: Increasing the recall rate to 2.0% would increase the detection rate from 4.20 parts per thousand to 4.52 parts per thousand due to the earlier detection of interval cancers. Moreover, 0.54 parts per thousand of the screen-detected cancers would be detected 2 years earlier (late screen-detected cancers). At recall rates of 3.0% and 4.0% the detection rate would increase to 4.58 parts per thousand and 4.63 parts per thousand, respectively, and 0.64 parts per thousand and 0.72 parts per thousand, respectively, of the screen-detected cancers would be detected 2 years earlier. For each 1.0% incremental increase in recall rate above 5.0%, the detection rate would increase by approximately 0.03 parts per thousand, with positive predictive values decreasing to below 10%. Conclusion: Breast cancer can be detected earlier by lowering the threshold for recall, especially for recall rates of 1%-4%. With further recall rate increases, cancer detection levels off with a disproportionate increase of false-positive rates.
引用
收藏
页码:748 / 754
页数:7
相关论文
共 16 条
  • [1] Stage distribution at first and repeat examinations in breast cancer screening
    Boer, R
    de Koning, H
    van Oortmarssen, G
    Warmerdam, P
    van der Maas, P
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCREENING, 1999, 6 (03) : 132 - 138
  • [2] Burhenne LJW, 2000, RADIOLOGY, V215, P554
  • [3] International variation in screening mammography interpretations in community-based programs
    Elmore, JG
    Nakano, CY
    Koepsell, TD
    Desnick, LM
    D'Orsi, CJ
    Ransohoff, DF
    [J]. JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2003, 95 (18): : 1384 - 1393
  • [4] Fracheboud J, 1998, INT J CANCER, V75, P694, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0215(19980302)75:5<694::AID-IJC6>3.0.CO
  • [5] 2-U
  • [6] Recall and detection rates in screening mammography - A review of clinical experience - Implications for practice guidelines
    Gur, D
    Sumkin, JH
    Hardesty, LA
    Clearfield, RJ
    Cohen, CS
    Ganott, MA
    Hakim, CM
    Harris, KM
    Poller, WR
    Shah, R
    Wallace, LP
    Rockette, HE
    [J]. CANCER, 2004, 100 (08) : 1590 - 1594
  • [7] Computer-aided detection versus independent double reading of masses on mammograms
    Karssemeijer, N
    Otten, JDM
    Verbeek, ALM
    Groenewoud, JH
    de Koning, HJ
    Hendriks, JHCL
    Holland, R
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2003, 227 (01) : 192 - 200
  • [8] Reporting of performance indicators of mammography screening in Europe
    Lynge, E
    Olsen, AH
    Fracheboud, J
    Patnick, J
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION, 2003, 12 (03) : 213 - 222
  • [9] *NETB, 1999, 7 NETB ER U ROTT DEP
  • [10] *NETB, 2002, 10 NETB ER U ROTT DE