Cargando…

Benefit‐to‐harm ratio of the Danish breast cancer screening programme

The primary aim of breast cancer screening is to reduce breast cancer mortality, but screening also has negative side‐effects as overdiagnosis. To evaluate a screening programme, both benefits and harms should be considered. Published estimates of the benefit‐to‐harm ratio, the number of breast canc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Beau, Anna‐Belle, Lynge, Elsebeth, Njor, Sisse Helle, Vejborg, Ilse, Lophaven, Søren Nymand
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5488203/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28470685
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ijc.30758
_version_ 1783246616069668864
author Beau, Anna‐Belle
Lynge, Elsebeth
Njor, Sisse Helle
Vejborg, Ilse
Lophaven, Søren Nymand
author_facet Beau, Anna‐Belle
Lynge, Elsebeth
Njor, Sisse Helle
Vejborg, Ilse
Lophaven, Søren Nymand
author_sort Beau, Anna‐Belle
collection PubMed
description The primary aim of breast cancer screening is to reduce breast cancer mortality, but screening also has negative side‐effects as overdiagnosis. To evaluate a screening programme, both benefits and harms should be considered. Published estimates of the benefit‐to‐harm ratio, the number of breast cancer deaths prevented divided by the number of overdiagnosed breast cancer cases, varied considerably. The objective of the study was to estimate the benefit‐to‐harm ratio of breast cancer screening in Denmark. The numbers of breast cancer deaths prevented and overdiagnosed cases [invasive and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)] were estimated per 1,000 women aged 50–79, using national published estimates for breast cancer mortality and overdiagnosis, and national incidence and mortality rates. Estimations were made for both invited and screened women. Among 1,000 women invited to screening from age 50 to age 69 and followed until age 79, we estimated that 5.4 breast cancer deaths would be prevented and 2.1 cases overdiagnosed, under the observed scenario in Denmark of a breast cancer mortality reduction of 23.4% and 2.3% of the breast cancer cases being overdiagnosed. The estimated benefit‐to‐harm ratio was 2.6 for invited women and 2.5 for screened women. Hence, 2–3 women would be prevented from dying from breast cancer for every woman overdiagnosed with invasive breast cancer or DCIS. The difference between the previous published ratios and 2.6 for Denmark is probably more a reflection of the accuracy of the underlying estimates than of the actual screening programmes. Therefore, benefit‐to‐harm ratios should be used cautiously.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5488203
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54882032017-07-13 Benefit‐to‐harm ratio of the Danish breast cancer screening programme Beau, Anna‐Belle Lynge, Elsebeth Njor, Sisse Helle Vejborg, Ilse Lophaven, Søren Nymand Int J Cancer Cancer Epidemiology The primary aim of breast cancer screening is to reduce breast cancer mortality, but screening also has negative side‐effects as overdiagnosis. To evaluate a screening programme, both benefits and harms should be considered. Published estimates of the benefit‐to‐harm ratio, the number of breast cancer deaths prevented divided by the number of overdiagnosed breast cancer cases, varied considerably. The objective of the study was to estimate the benefit‐to‐harm ratio of breast cancer screening in Denmark. The numbers of breast cancer deaths prevented and overdiagnosed cases [invasive and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)] were estimated per 1,000 women aged 50–79, using national published estimates for breast cancer mortality and overdiagnosis, and national incidence and mortality rates. Estimations were made for both invited and screened women. Among 1,000 women invited to screening from age 50 to age 69 and followed until age 79, we estimated that 5.4 breast cancer deaths would be prevented and 2.1 cases overdiagnosed, under the observed scenario in Denmark of a breast cancer mortality reduction of 23.4% and 2.3% of the breast cancer cases being overdiagnosed. The estimated benefit‐to‐harm ratio was 2.6 for invited women and 2.5 for screened women. Hence, 2–3 women would be prevented from dying from breast cancer for every woman overdiagnosed with invasive breast cancer or DCIS. The difference between the previous published ratios and 2.6 for Denmark is probably more a reflection of the accuracy of the underlying estimates than of the actual screening programmes. Therefore, benefit‐to‐harm ratios should be used cautiously. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017-05-10 2017-08-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5488203/ /pubmed/28470685 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ijc.30758 Text en © 2017 The Authors International Journal of Cancer published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of UICC This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Cancer Epidemiology
Beau, Anna‐Belle
Lynge, Elsebeth
Njor, Sisse Helle
Vejborg, Ilse
Lophaven, Søren Nymand
Benefit‐to‐harm ratio of the Danish breast cancer screening programme
title Benefit‐to‐harm ratio of the Danish breast cancer screening programme
title_full Benefit‐to‐harm ratio of the Danish breast cancer screening programme
title_fullStr Benefit‐to‐harm ratio of the Danish breast cancer screening programme
title_full_unstemmed Benefit‐to‐harm ratio of the Danish breast cancer screening programme
title_short Benefit‐to‐harm ratio of the Danish breast cancer screening programme
title_sort benefit‐to‐harm ratio of the danish breast cancer screening programme
topic Cancer Epidemiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5488203/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28470685
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ijc.30758
work_keys_str_mv AT beauannabelle benefittoharmratioofthedanishbreastcancerscreeningprogramme
AT lyngeelsebeth benefittoharmratioofthedanishbreastcancerscreeningprogramme
AT njorsissehelle benefittoharmratioofthedanishbreastcancerscreeningprogramme
AT vejborgilse benefittoharmratioofthedanishbreastcancerscreeningprogramme
AT lophavensørennymand benefittoharmratioofthedanishbreastcancerscreeningprogramme