Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 1/2011

01-05-2011 | Invited Commentary

False positive mammograms in Europe: do they affect reattendance?

Authors: Talya Salz, Jessica T. DeFrank, Noel T. Brewer

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 1/2011

Login to get access

Excerpt

False positive results from screening mammography are quite common in the United States, with almost half of women receiving at least one false positive result over 10 years of annual screening [1]. In Europe, false positive mammography results are likely less common, as European countries report many fewer abnormal mammogram results and, on the whole, have similar breast cancer detection rates [25]. Reasons for lower false positive rates in Europe may include a less litigious environment, having higher quality standards, having the double-viewing of film be more common practice, having higher tolerance for missing breast cancer (false negatives), requiring higher volume for radiologists interpreting mammograms, and radiologists having access to patients’ previous screening records [6, 7]. Even with these safeguards, many European women experience false positive mammograms. …
Literature
1.
go back to reference Elmore JG, Barton MB, Moceri VM et al (1998) Ten-year risk of false positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations. N Engl J Med 338(16):1089–1096PubMedCrossRef Elmore JG, Barton MB, Moceri VM et al (1998) Ten-year risk of false positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations. N Engl J Med 338(16):1089–1096PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Yankaskas BC, Klabunde CN, Ancelle-Park R et al (2004) International comparison of performance measures for screening mammography: can it be done? J Med Screen 11(4):187–193PubMedCrossRef Yankaskas BC, Klabunde CN, Ancelle-Park R et al (2004) International comparison of performance measures for screening mammography: can it be done? J Med Screen 11(4):187–193PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Smith-Bindman R, Ballard-Barbash R, Miglioretti DL et al (2005) Comparing the performance of mammography screening in the USA and the UK. J Med Screen 12(1):50–54PubMedCrossRef Smith-Bindman R, Ballard-Barbash R, Miglioretti DL et al (2005) Comparing the performance of mammography screening in the USA and the UK. J Med Screen 12(1):50–54PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Smith-Bindman R, Chu PW, Miglioretti DL et al (2003) Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United Kingdom. JAMA 290(16):2129–2137PubMedCrossRef Smith-Bindman R, Chu PW, Miglioretti DL et al (2003) Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United Kingdom. JAMA 290(16):2129–2137PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Hofvind S, Vacek PM, Skelly J et al (2008) Comparing screening mammography for early breast cancer detection in Vermont and Norway. J Natl Cancer Inst 100(15):1082–1091PubMedCrossRef Hofvind S, Vacek PM, Skelly J et al (2008) Comparing screening mammography for early breast cancer detection in Vermont and Norway. J Natl Cancer Inst 100(15):1082–1091PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Nass S, Ball J (eds) (2005) Improving breast imaging quality standards. Institute of Medicine and National Research Council of the National Academies, Washington, DC Nass S, Ball J (eds) (2005) Improving breast imaging quality standards. Institute of Medicine and National Research Council of the National Academies, Washington, DC
7.
go back to reference Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C et al (2008) European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Fourth edition–summary document. Ann Oncol 19(4):614–622PubMedCrossRef Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C et al (2008) European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Fourth edition–summary document. Ann Oncol 19(4):614–622PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Brewer NT, Salz T, Lillie SE (2007) Systematic review: the long-term effects of false-positive mammograms. Ann Intern Med 146(7):502–510PubMed Brewer NT, Salz T, Lillie SE (2007) Systematic review: the long-term effects of false-positive mammograms. Ann Intern Med 146(7):502–510PubMed
9.
go back to reference Salz T, Richman AR, Brewer NT (2010) Meta-analyses of the effect of false-positive mammograms on generic and specific psychosocial outcomes. Psycho-Oncology 19(10):1026–1034PubMedCrossRef Salz T, Richman AR, Brewer NT (2010) Meta-analyses of the effect of false-positive mammograms on generic and specific psychosocial outcomes. Psycho-Oncology 19(10):1026–1034PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Brett J, Austoker J (2001) Women who are recalled for further investigation for breast screening: psychological consequences 3 years after recall and factors affecting re-attendance. J Public Health Med 23(4):292–300PubMedCrossRef Brett J, Austoker J (2001) Women who are recalled for further investigation for breast screening: psychological consequences 3 years after recall and factors affecting re-attendance. J Public Health Med 23(4):292–300PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Gram IT, Lund E, Slenker SE (1990) Quality of life following a false positive mammogram. Br J Cancer 62(6):1018–1022PubMedCrossRef Gram IT, Lund E, Slenker SE (1990) Quality of life following a false positive mammogram. Br J Cancer 62(6):1018–1022PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Lampic C, Thurfjell E, Sjoden PO (2003) The influence of a false-positive mammogram on a woman’s subsequent behaviour for detecting breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 39(12):1730–1737PubMedCrossRef Lampic C, Thurfjell E, Sjoden PO (2003) The influence of a false-positive mammogram on a woman’s subsequent behaviour for detecting breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 39(12):1730–1737PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Nelson HD, Tyne K, Naik A et al. (2009) Screening for breast cancer: an update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 151(10):727–737, W237–W242 Nelson HD, Tyne K, Naik A et al. (2009) Screening for breast cancer: an update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 151(10):727–737, W237–W242
14.
go back to reference Andersen SB, Vejborg I, von Euler-Chelpin M (2008) Participation behaviour following a false positive test in the Copenhagen mammography screening programme. Acta Oncol 47(4):550–555PubMedCrossRef Andersen SB, Vejborg I, von Euler-Chelpin M (2008) Participation behaviour following a false positive test in the Copenhagen mammography screening programme. Acta Oncol 47(4):550–555PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Lerman C, Trock B, Rimer BK et al (1991) Psychological side effects of breast cancer screening. Health Psychol 10(4):259–267PubMedCrossRef Lerman C, Trock B, Rimer BK et al (1991) Psychological side effects of breast cancer screening. Health Psychol 10(4):259–267PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Lerman C, Trock B, Rimer BK et al (1991) Psychological and behavioral implications of abnormal mammograms. Ann Intern Med 114(8):657–661PubMed Lerman C, Trock B, Rimer BK et al (1991) Psychological and behavioral implications of abnormal mammograms. Ann Intern Med 114(8):657–661PubMed
17.
go back to reference Defrank JT, Brewer NT (2010) A model of the influence of false-positive mammography screening results on subsequent screening. Health Psychol Rev 4(2):112–127CrossRef Defrank JT, Brewer NT (2010) A model of the influence of false-positive mammography screening results on subsequent screening. Health Psychol Rev 4(2):112–127CrossRef
Metadata
Title
False positive mammograms in Europe: do they affect reattendance?
Authors
Talya Salz
Jessica T. DeFrank
Noel T. Brewer
Publication date
01-05-2011
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 1/2011
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-010-1245-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2011

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 1/2011 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine