Cargando…

Overdiagnosis in organised mammography screening in Denmark. A comparative study

BACKGROUND: Overdiagnosis in cancer screening is the detection of cancer lesions that would otherwise not have been detected. It is arguably the most important harm. We quantified overdiagnosis in the Danish mammography screening programme, which is uniquely suited for this purpose, as only 20% of t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jørgensen, Karsten J, Zahl, Per-Henrik, Gøtzsche, Peter C
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2807851/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20028513
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6874-9-36
_version_ 1782176431636217856
author Jørgensen, Karsten J
Zahl, Per-Henrik
Gøtzsche, Peter C
author_facet Jørgensen, Karsten J
Zahl, Per-Henrik
Gøtzsche, Peter C
author_sort Jørgensen, Karsten J
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Overdiagnosis in cancer screening is the detection of cancer lesions that would otherwise not have been detected. It is arguably the most important harm. We quantified overdiagnosis in the Danish mammography screening programme, which is uniquely suited for this purpose, as only 20% of the Danish population has been offered organised mammography screening over a long time-period. METHODS: We collected incidence rates of carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer in areas with and without screening over 13 years with screening (1991-2003), and 20 years before its introduction (1971-1990). We explored the incidence increase comparing unadjusted incidence rates and used Poisson regression analysis to compensate for the background incidence trend, variation in age distribution and geographical variation in incidence. RESULTS: For the screened age group, 50 to 69 years, we found an overdiagnosis of 35% when we compared unadjusted incidence rates for the screened and non-screened areas, but after compensating for a small decline in incidence in older, previously screened women. Our adjusted Poisson regression analysis indicated a relative risk of 1.40 (95% CI: 1.35-1.45) for the whole screening period, and a potential compensatory drop in older women of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.88-0.96), yielding an overdiagnosis of 33%, which we consider the most reliable estimate. The drop in previously screened women was only present in one of the two screened regions and was small in absolute numbers. DISCUSSION: One in four breast cancers diagnosed in the screened age group in the Danish screening programme is overdiagnosed. Our estimate for Denmark is lower than that for comparable countries, likely because of lower uptake, lower recall rates and lower detection rates of carcinoma in situ.
format Text
id pubmed-2807851
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28078512010-01-19 Overdiagnosis in organised mammography screening in Denmark. A comparative study Jørgensen, Karsten J Zahl, Per-Henrik Gøtzsche, Peter C BMC Womens Health Research article BACKGROUND: Overdiagnosis in cancer screening is the detection of cancer lesions that would otherwise not have been detected. It is arguably the most important harm. We quantified overdiagnosis in the Danish mammography screening programme, which is uniquely suited for this purpose, as only 20% of the Danish population has been offered organised mammography screening over a long time-period. METHODS: We collected incidence rates of carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer in areas with and without screening over 13 years with screening (1991-2003), and 20 years before its introduction (1971-1990). We explored the incidence increase comparing unadjusted incidence rates and used Poisson regression analysis to compensate for the background incidence trend, variation in age distribution and geographical variation in incidence. RESULTS: For the screened age group, 50 to 69 years, we found an overdiagnosis of 35% when we compared unadjusted incidence rates for the screened and non-screened areas, but after compensating for a small decline in incidence in older, previously screened women. Our adjusted Poisson regression analysis indicated a relative risk of 1.40 (95% CI: 1.35-1.45) for the whole screening period, and a potential compensatory drop in older women of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.88-0.96), yielding an overdiagnosis of 33%, which we consider the most reliable estimate. The drop in previously screened women was only present in one of the two screened regions and was small in absolute numbers. DISCUSSION: One in four breast cancers diagnosed in the screened age group in the Danish screening programme is overdiagnosed. Our estimate for Denmark is lower than that for comparable countries, likely because of lower uptake, lower recall rates and lower detection rates of carcinoma in situ. BioMed Central 2009-12-22 /pmc/articles/PMC2807851/ /pubmed/20028513 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6874-9-36 Text en Copyright ©2009 Jørgensen et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research article
Jørgensen, Karsten J
Zahl, Per-Henrik
Gøtzsche, Peter C
Overdiagnosis in organised mammography screening in Denmark. A comparative study
title Overdiagnosis in organised mammography screening in Denmark. A comparative study
title_full Overdiagnosis in organised mammography screening in Denmark. A comparative study
title_fullStr Overdiagnosis in organised mammography screening in Denmark. A comparative study
title_full_unstemmed Overdiagnosis in organised mammography screening in Denmark. A comparative study
title_short Overdiagnosis in organised mammography screening in Denmark. A comparative study
title_sort overdiagnosis in organised mammography screening in denmark. a comparative study
topic Research article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2807851/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20028513
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6874-9-36
work_keys_str_mv AT jørgensenkarstenj overdiagnosisinorganisedmammographyscreeningindenmarkacomparativestudy
AT zahlperhenrik overdiagnosisinorganisedmammographyscreeningindenmarkacomparativestudy
AT gøtzschepeterc overdiagnosisinorganisedmammographyscreeningindenmarkacomparativestudy