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 Jun 28;6(1):122.
doi: 10.1186/s13643-017-0510-y.

What determines the effects and costs of breast cancer screening? A protocol of a systematic review of reviews

O Mandrik  1   2 , O I Ekwunife  3   4 , N Zielonke  5 , F Meheus  6 , J L Severens  7   8 , S K Lhachimi  3   9 , R Murillo  6   10   11
Affiliations

What determines the effects and costs of breast cancer screening? A protocol of a systematic review of reviews

O Mandrik et al. Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Multiple reviews demonstrated high variability in effectiveness and cost-effectiveness outcomes among studies on breast cancer screening (BCS) programmes. No study to our knowledge has summarized the current evidence on determinants of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the most used BCS approaches or tried to explain differences in conclusions of systematic reviews on this topic. Based on published reviews, this systematic review aims to assess the degree of variability of determinants for (a) effectiveness and (b) cost-effectiveness of BCS programmes using mammography, clinical breast examination, breast self-examination, ultrasonography, or their combinations among the general population.

Methods: We will perform a comprehensive systematic literature search in Cochrane, Scopus, Embase, and Medline (via Pubmed). The search will be supplemented with hand searching of references of the included reviews, with hand searching in the specialized journals, and by contacting prominent experts in the field. Additional search for grey literature will be conducted on the websites of international cancer associations and networks. Two trained research assistants will screen titles and abstracts of publications independently, with at least random 10% of all abstracts being also screened by the principal researcher. The full texts of the systematic reviews will then be screened independently by two authors, and disagreements will be solved by consensus. The included reviews will be grouped by publication year, outcomes, designs of original studies, and quality. Additionally, for reviews published since 2011, transparency in reporting will be assessed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist for the review on determinants of effectiveness and a modified PRISMA checklist for the review on determinants for cost-effectiveness. The study will apply the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews checklist to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. We will report the data extracted from the systematic reviews in a systematic format. Meta-meta-analysis of extracted data will be conducted when feasible.

Discussion: This systematic review of reviews will examine the degree of variability in the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of BCS programmes.

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42016050764 and CRD42016050765.

Keywords: Breast cancer screening; Cost-effectiveness; Costs; Effectiveness; Efficacy; Systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. World Health Organization . Women’s health. Fact sheet no. 334. 2013.
    1. Senkus E, Kyriakides S, Ohno S, Penault-Llorca F, Poortmans P, Rutgers E, Zackrisson S, Cardoso F. Primary breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2015;26(Suppl 5):8–30. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdv298. - DOI - PubMed
    1. U.S. Preventive Service Task Force: breast cancer: screening. January 2016. https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/UpdateSummar.... Accessed 10 Jan 2017.
    1. Lauby-Secretan B, Scoccianti C, Loomis D, Benbrahim-Tallaa L, Bouvard V, Bianchini F, Straif K. International Agency for Research on Cancer Handbook Working Group. Breast-cancer screening—viewpoint of the IARC Working Group. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(24):2353–8. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsr1504363. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Oeffinger KC, Fontham ET, Etzioni R, Herzig A. Breast cancer screening for women at average risk: 2015 guideline update from the American Cancer Society. JAMA. 2015;314(15):1599–614. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.12783. - DOI - PMC - PubMed