Comparing the performance of mammography screening in the USA and the UK
- PMID: 15814020
- DOI: 10.1258/0969141053279130
Comparing the performance of mammography screening in the USA and the UK
Abstract
To compare the performance of screening mammography in the USA and the UK, a consecutive sample of screening mammograms was obtained in women aged 50 and older from 1996 to 1999 who participated in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium in the USA (n = 978,591) and the National Health Service Breast Cancer Screening Program in the UK (n = 3.94 million), including 6943 diagnosed with breast cancer within 12 months of screening. Recall rates were defined as the percentage of screening mammograms with a recommendation for further evaluation including diagnostic mammography, ultrasound, clinical examination or biopsy, and cancer detection rates including invasive cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosed within 12 months of a screening mammogram. All results were stratified by whether examinations were first or subsequent and adjusted to a standard age distribution. Among women who underwent a first screening mammogram, 13.3% of women in the USA versus 7.2% of women in the UK were recalled for further evaluation (relative risk for recall 1.9; 95% CI 1.8-1.9). For subsequent examinations recall rates were approximately 50% lower, but remained twice as high in the USA as in the UK. A similar percentage of women underwent biopsy in each setting, but rates of percutaneous biopsy were lower and rates of open surgical biopsy were higher in the USA. Women undergo screening approximately every 18 months in the USA and every 36 months in the UK. Based on a 20-year period of screening, the estimated percentage of women who would be recalled for additional testing was nearly threefold higher in the USA. The number of cancers detected was also higher in the USA (55 versus 43), and most of the increase was in the detection of small invasive and in situ cancers. The numbers of large cancers detected ( > 2 cm) were very similar between the two countries. Recall rates are approximately two to three times higher in the USA than in the UK. Importantly, despite less frequent screening in the USA, there are no substantial differences in the rates of detection of large cancers. Efforts to improve mammographic screening in the USA should target lowering the recall rate without reducing the cancer detection rate.
Similar articles
-
Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United kingdom.JAMA. 2003 Oct 22;290(16):2129-37. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.16.2129. JAMA. 2003. PMID: 14570948
-
The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program: report on the first 4 years of mammography provided to medically underserved women.AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998 Jan;170(1):97-104. doi: 10.2214/ajr.170.1.9423608. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998. PMID: 9423608
-
Effect of recall rate on earlier screen detection of breast cancers based on the Dutch performance indicators.J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005 May 18;97(10):748-54. doi: 10.1093/jnci/dji131. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005. PMID: 15900044
-
Breast cancer screening.Int J Clin Pract. 2001 Oct;55(8):531-5. Int J Clin Pract. 2001. PMID: 11695074 Review.
-
The role of mammography in breast cancer prevention.Curr Opin Oncol. 1999 Sep;11(5):414-8. doi: 10.1097/00001622-199909000-00017. Curr Opin Oncol. 1999. PMID: 10505782 Review.
Cited by
-
Cross-national comparison of screening mammography accuracy measures in U.S., Norway, and Spain.Eur Radiol. 2016 Aug;26(8):2520-8. doi: 10.1007/s00330-015-4074-8. Epub 2015 Nov 11. Eur Radiol. 2016. PMID: 26560729 Free PMC article.
-
Number of mammography cases read per year is a strong predictor of sensitivity.J Med Imaging (Bellingham). 2014 Apr;1(1):015503. doi: 10.1117/1.JMI.1.1.015503. Epub 2014 May 7. J Med Imaging (Bellingham). 2014. PMID: 26158030 Free PMC article.
-
Cumulative false positive recall rate and association with participant related factors in a population based breast cancer screening programme.J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006 Apr;60(4):316-21. doi: 10.1136/jech.2005.042119. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006. PMID: 16537348 Free PMC article.
-
A Warning about Warning Signals for Interpreting Mammograms.Radiology. 2022 Feb;302(2):284-285. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021212092. Epub 2021 Nov 9. Radiology. 2022. PMID: 34751621 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Comparing sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography in the United States and Denmark.Int J Cancer. 2015 Nov 1;137(9):2198-207. doi: 10.1002/ijc.29593. Epub 2015 Jun 1. Int J Cancer. 2015. PMID: 25944711 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical