Cargando…

Breast cancer risk is increased in the years following false-positive breast cancer screening

A small number of studies have investigated breast cancer (BC) risk among women with a history of false-positive recall (FPR) in BC screening, but none of them has used time-to-event analysis while at the same time quantifying the effect of false-negative diagnostic assessment (FNDA). FNDA occurs wh...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Goossens, Mathijs C., De Brabander, Isabel, De Greve, Jacques, Vaes, Evelien, Van Ongeval, Chantal, Van Herck, Koen, Kellen, Eliane
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5553233/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27749382
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000313
_version_ 1783256594736218112
author Goossens, Mathijs C.
De Brabander, Isabel
De Greve, Jacques
Vaes, Evelien
Van Ongeval, Chantal
Van Herck, Koen
Kellen, Eliane
author_facet Goossens, Mathijs C.
De Brabander, Isabel
De Greve, Jacques
Vaes, Evelien
Van Ongeval, Chantal
Van Herck, Koen
Kellen, Eliane
author_sort Goossens, Mathijs C.
collection PubMed
description A small number of studies have investigated breast cancer (BC) risk among women with a history of false-positive recall (FPR) in BC screening, but none of them has used time-to-event analysis while at the same time quantifying the effect of false-negative diagnostic assessment (FNDA). FNDA occurs when screening detects BC, but this BC is missed on diagnostic assessment (DA). As a result of FNDA, screenings that detected cancer are incorrectly classified as FPR. Our study linked data recorded in the Flemish BC screening program (women aged 50–69 years) to data from the national cancer registry. We used Cox proportional hazards models on a retrospective cohort of 298 738 women to assess the association between FPR and subsequent BC, while adjusting for potential confounders. The mean follow-up was 6.9 years. Compared with women without recall, women with a history of FPR were at an increased risk of developing BC [hazard ratio=2.10 (95% confidence interval: 1.92–2.31)]. However, 22% of BC after FPR was due to FNDA. The hazard ratio dropped to 1.69 (95% confidence interval: 1.52–1.87) when FNDA was excluded. Women with FPR have a subsequently increased BC risk compared with women without recall. The risk is higher for women who have a FPR BI-RADS 4 or 5 compared with FPR BI-RADS 3. There is room for improvement of diagnostic assessment: 41% of the excess risk is explained by FNDA after baseline screening.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5553233
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55532332017-08-28 Breast cancer risk is increased in the years following false-positive breast cancer screening Goossens, Mathijs C. De Brabander, Isabel De Greve, Jacques Vaes, Evelien Van Ongeval, Chantal Van Herck, Koen Kellen, Eliane Eur J Cancer Prev Research Papers: Breast Cancer A small number of studies have investigated breast cancer (BC) risk among women with a history of false-positive recall (FPR) in BC screening, but none of them has used time-to-event analysis while at the same time quantifying the effect of false-negative diagnostic assessment (FNDA). FNDA occurs when screening detects BC, but this BC is missed on diagnostic assessment (DA). As a result of FNDA, screenings that detected cancer are incorrectly classified as FPR. Our study linked data recorded in the Flemish BC screening program (women aged 50–69 years) to data from the national cancer registry. We used Cox proportional hazards models on a retrospective cohort of 298 738 women to assess the association between FPR and subsequent BC, while adjusting for potential confounders. The mean follow-up was 6.9 years. Compared with women without recall, women with a history of FPR were at an increased risk of developing BC [hazard ratio=2.10 (95% confidence interval: 1.92–2.31)]. However, 22% of BC after FPR was due to FNDA. The hazard ratio dropped to 1.69 (95% confidence interval: 1.52–1.87) when FNDA was excluded. Women with FPR have a subsequently increased BC risk compared with women without recall. The risk is higher for women who have a FPR BI-RADS 4 or 5 compared with FPR BI-RADS 3. There is room for improvement of diagnostic assessment: 41% of the excess risk is explained by FNDA after baseline screening. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2017-09 2017-08-02 /pmc/articles/PMC5553233/ /pubmed/27749382 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000313 Text en Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
spellingShingle Research Papers: Breast Cancer
Goossens, Mathijs C.
De Brabander, Isabel
De Greve, Jacques
Vaes, Evelien
Van Ongeval, Chantal
Van Herck, Koen
Kellen, Eliane
Breast cancer risk is increased in the years following false-positive breast cancer screening
title Breast cancer risk is increased in the years following false-positive breast cancer screening
title_full Breast cancer risk is increased in the years following false-positive breast cancer screening
title_fullStr Breast cancer risk is increased in the years following false-positive breast cancer screening
title_full_unstemmed Breast cancer risk is increased in the years following false-positive breast cancer screening
title_short Breast cancer risk is increased in the years following false-positive breast cancer screening
title_sort breast cancer risk is increased in the years following false-positive breast cancer screening
topic Research Papers: Breast Cancer
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5553233/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27749382
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000313
work_keys_str_mv AT goossensmathijsc breastcancerriskisincreasedintheyearsfollowingfalsepositivebreastcancerscreening
AT debrabanderisabel breastcancerriskisincreasedintheyearsfollowingfalsepositivebreastcancerscreening
AT degrevejacques breastcancerriskisincreasedintheyearsfollowingfalsepositivebreastcancerscreening
AT vaesevelien breastcancerriskisincreasedintheyearsfollowingfalsepositivebreastcancerscreening
AT vanongevalchantal breastcancerriskisincreasedintheyearsfollowingfalsepositivebreastcancerscreening
AT vanherckkoen breastcancerriskisincreasedintheyearsfollowingfalsepositivebreastcancerscreening
AT kelleneliane breastcancerriskisincreasedintheyearsfollowingfalsepositivebreastcancerscreening