Cargando…

Overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening: the importance of length of observation period and lead time

BACKGROUND: Overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening is a controversial topic. One difficulty in estimation of overdiagnosis is the separation of overdiagnosis from lead time that is the advance in the time of diagnosis of cancers, which confers an artificial increase in incidence when a screening p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Duffy, Stephen W, Parmar, Dharmishta
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3706885/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23680223
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/bcr3427
_version_ 1782276427039637504
author Duffy, Stephen W
Parmar, Dharmishta
author_facet Duffy, Stephen W
Parmar, Dharmishta
author_sort Duffy, Stephen W
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening is a controversial topic. One difficulty in estimation of overdiagnosis is the separation of overdiagnosis from lead time that is the advance in the time of diagnosis of cancers, which confers an artificial increase in incidence when a screening programme is introduced. METHODS: We postulated a female population aged 50-79 with a similar age structure and age-specific breast cancer incidence as in England and Wales before the screening programme. We then imposed a two-yearly screening programme; screening women aged 50-69, to run for twenty years, with exponentially distributed lead time with an average of 40 months in screen-detected cancers. We imposed no effect of the screening on incidence other than lead time. RESULTS: Comparison of age- and time-specific incidence between the screened and unscreened populations showed a major effect of lead time, which could only be adjusted for by follow-up for more than two decades and including ten years after the last screen. From lead time alone, twenty-year observation at ages 50-69 would confer an observed excess incidence of 37%. The excess would only fall below 10% with 25 years or more follow-up. For the excess to be nullified, we would require 30 year follow-up including observation up to 10 years above the upper age limit for screening. CONCLUSION: Studies using shorter observation periods will overestimate overdiagnosis by inclusion of cancers diagnosed early due to lead time among the nominally overdiagnosed tumours.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3706885
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37068852013-07-11 Overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening: the importance of length of observation period and lead time Duffy, Stephen W Parmar, Dharmishta Breast Cancer Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening is a controversial topic. One difficulty in estimation of overdiagnosis is the separation of overdiagnosis from lead time that is the advance in the time of diagnosis of cancers, which confers an artificial increase in incidence when a screening programme is introduced. METHODS: We postulated a female population aged 50-79 with a similar age structure and age-specific breast cancer incidence as in England and Wales before the screening programme. We then imposed a two-yearly screening programme; screening women aged 50-69, to run for twenty years, with exponentially distributed lead time with an average of 40 months in screen-detected cancers. We imposed no effect of the screening on incidence other than lead time. RESULTS: Comparison of age- and time-specific incidence between the screened and unscreened populations showed a major effect of lead time, which could only be adjusted for by follow-up for more than two decades and including ten years after the last screen. From lead time alone, twenty-year observation at ages 50-69 would confer an observed excess incidence of 37%. The excess would only fall below 10% with 25 years or more follow-up. For the excess to be nullified, we would require 30 year follow-up including observation up to 10 years above the upper age limit for screening. CONCLUSION: Studies using shorter observation periods will overestimate overdiagnosis by inclusion of cancers diagnosed early due to lead time among the nominally overdiagnosed tumours. BioMed Central 2013 2013-05-16 /pmc/articles/PMC3706885/ /pubmed/23680223 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/bcr3427 Text en Copyright © 2013 Duffy 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
Duffy, Stephen W
Parmar, Dharmishta
Overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening: the importance of length of observation period and lead time
title Overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening: the importance of length of observation period and lead time
title_full Overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening: the importance of length of observation period and lead time
title_fullStr Overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening: the importance of length of observation period and lead time
title_full_unstemmed Overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening: the importance of length of observation period and lead time
title_short Overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening: the importance of length of observation period and lead time
title_sort overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening: the importance of length of observation period and lead time
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3706885/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23680223
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/bcr3427
work_keys_str_mv AT duffystephenw overdiagnosisinbreastcancerscreeningtheimportanceoflengthofobservationperiodandleadtime
AT parmardharmishta overdiagnosisinbreastcancerscreeningtheimportanceoflengthofobservationperiodandleadtime