Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Mar;26(3):397-403.
doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-16-0524. Epub 2017 Feb 9.

Impact of a False-Positive Screening Mammogram on Subsequent Screening Behavior and Stage at Breast Cancer Diagnosis

Affiliations

Impact of a False-Positive Screening Mammogram on Subsequent Screening Behavior and Stage at Breast Cancer Diagnosis

Firas M Dabbous et al. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2017 Mar.

Abstract

Background: Experiencing a false positive (FP) screening mammogram is economically, physically, and emotionally burdensome, which may affect future screening behavior by delaying the next scheduled mammogram or by avoiding screening altogether. We sought to examine the impact of a FP screening mammogram on the subsequent screening mammography behavior.Methods: Delay in obtaining subsequent screening was defined as any mammogram performed more than 12 months from index mammogram. The Kaplan-Meier (product limit) estimator and Cox proportional hazards model were used to estimate the unadjusted delay and the hazard ratio (HR) of delay of the subsequent screening mammogram within the next 36 months from the index mammogram date.Results: A total of 650,232 true negative (TN) and 90,918 FP mammograms from 261,767 women were included. The likelihood of a subsequent mammogram was higher in women experiencing a TN result than women experiencing a FP result (85.0% vs. 77.9%, P < 0.001). The median delay in returning to screening was higher for FP versus TN (13 months vs. 3 months, P < 0.001). Women with TN result were 36% more likely to return to screening in the next 36 months compared with women with a FP result HR = 1.36 (95% CI, 1.35-1.37). Experiencing a FP mammogram increases the risk of late stage at diagnosis compared with prior TN mammogram (P < 0.001).Conclusions: Women with a FP mammogram were more likely to delay their subsequent screening compared with women with a TN mammogram.Impact: A prior FP experience may subsequently increase the 4-year cumulative risk of late stage at diagnosis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(3); 397-403. ©2017 AACR.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No other potential conflict of interest to disclose.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Primary and secondary analyses design overview FP vs TN. The first arrow represents the index mammogram (true negative and false positive mammograms only). The shaded area represents the first 12 months after index mammogram and index date (T=0) was defined at the end of the shaded area. Mammograms that were followed by a screening mammogram within 12 months were excluded. The second arrow represents the subsequent mammogram after index mammogram. For the secondary analyses the cumulative risk of late stage at diagnosis was estimated over a 4 years period following the index mammogram.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Kaplan-Meier estimates for time to next screen in months by index mammogram result

References

    1. Berry DA, Cronin KA, Plevritis SK, Fryback DG, Clarke L, Zelen M, et al. Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005 Oct 27;353:1784–92. - PubMed
    1. Chubak J, Boudreau DM, Fishman PA, Elmore JG. Cost of breast-related care in the year following false positive screening mammograms. Med Care. 2010 Sep;48:815–20. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brodersen J, Siersma VD. Long-term psychosocial consequences of false-positive screening mammography. Ann Fam Med. 2013 Mar-Apr;11:106–15. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brett J, Bankhead C, Henderson B, Watson E, Austoker J. The psychological impact of mammographic screening. A systematic review. Psychooncology. 2005 Nov;14:917–38. - PubMed
    1. Kerlikowske K, Hubbard RA, Miglioretti DL, Geller BM, Yankaskas BC, Lehman CD, et al. Comparative effectiveness of digital versus film-screen mammography in community practice in the United States: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2011 Oct 18;155:493–502. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms