Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 2/2014

01-06-2014 | Clinical Trial

Re-attendance at biennial screening mammography following a repeated false positive recall

Authors: Elisabeth G. Klompenhouwer, Lucien E. M. Duijm, Adri C. Voogd, Gerard J. den Heeten, Luc J. Strobbe, Marieke W. Louwman, Jan Willem Coebergh, Dick Venderink, Mireille J. M. Broeders

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 2/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

We determined the re-attendance rate at screening mammography after a single or a repeated false positive recall and we assessed the effects of transition from screen-film mammography (SFM) to full-field digital mammography (FFDM) on screening outcome in women recalled twice for the same mammographic abnormality. The study population consisted of a consecutive series of 302,912 SFM and 90,288 FFDM screens. During a 2 years follow-up period (until the next biennial screen), we collected the breast imaging reports and biopsy results of all recalled women. Re-attendance at biennial screening mammography was 93.2 % (95 % CI 93.1–93.3 %) for women with a negative screen (i.e., no recall at screening mammography), 65.4 % (95 % CI 64.0–66.8 %) for women recalled once, 56.7 % (95 % CI 47.1–66.4 %) for women recalled twice but for different lesions and 44.3 % (95 % CI 31.4–57.1 %) for women recalled twice for the same lesion. FFDM recalls comprised a significantly larger proportion of women who had been recalled twice for the same lesion (1.9 % of recalls (52 women) at FFDM vs. 0.9 % of recalls (37 women) at SFM, P < 0.001) and the positive predictive value of these recalls (PPV) was significantly lower at FFDM (15.4 vs. 35.1 %, P = 0.03). At review, 20 of 52 women (39.5 %, all with benign outcome) would not have been recalled for a second time at FFDM if the previous hard copy SFM screen had been available for comparison. We conclude that a repeated false positive recall for the same lesion significantly lowered the probability of screening re-attendance. The first round of FFDM significantly increased the proportion of women recalled twice for the same lesion, with a significantly lower PPV of these lesions. Almost 40 % of repeatedly recalled women would not have been recalled the second time if the previous hard copy SFM screen had been available for comparison at the time of FFDM.
Literature
2.
go back to reference Duijm LE, Groenewoud JH, Fracheboud J, Plaisier ML, Roumen RM, van Ineveld BM, van Beek M, de Koning HJ (2008) Utilization and cost of diagnostic imaging and biopsies following positive screening mammography in the southern breast cancer screening region of the Netherlands, 2000–2005. Eur Radiol 18(11):2390–2397. doi:10.1007/s00330-008-1043-5 PubMedCrossRef Duijm LE, Groenewoud JH, Fracheboud J, Plaisier ML, Roumen RM, van Ineveld BM, van Beek M, de Koning HJ (2008) Utilization and cost of diagnostic imaging and biopsies following positive screening mammography in the southern breast cancer screening region of the Netherlands, 2000–2005. Eur Radiol 18(11):2390–2397. doi:10.​1007/​s00330-008-1043-5 PubMedCrossRef
4.
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
5.
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):502–510PubMedCrossRef Brewer NT, Salz T, Lillie SE (2007) Systematic review: the long-term effects of false-positive mammograms. Ann Intern Med 146(7):502–510PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Roman R, Sala M, De La Vega M, Natal C, Galceran J, Gonzalez-Roman I, Baroja A, Zubizarreta R, Ascunce N, Salas D, Castells X (2011) Effect of false-positives and women’s characteristics on long-term adherence to breast cancer screening. Breast Cancer Res Treat 130(2):543–552. doi:10.1007/s10549-011-1581-4 PubMedCrossRef Roman R, Sala M, De La Vega M, Natal C, Galceran J, Gonzalez-Roman I, Baroja A, Zubizarreta R, Ascunce N, Salas D, Castells X (2011) Effect of false-positives and women’s characteristics on long-term adherence to breast cancer screening. Breast Cancer Res Treat 130(2):543–552. doi:10.​1007/​s10549-011-1581-4 PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Seigneurin A, Exbrayat C, Labarere J, Delafosse P, Poncet F, Colonna M (2011) Association of diagnostic work-up with subsequent attendance in a breast cancer screening program for false-positive cases. Breast Cancer Res Treat 127(1):221–228. doi:10.1007/s10549-010-1118-2 PubMedCrossRef Seigneurin A, Exbrayat C, Labarere J, Delafosse P, Poncet F, Colonna M (2011) Association of diagnostic work-up with subsequent attendance in a breast cancer screening program for false-positive cases. Breast Cancer Res Treat 127(1):221–228. doi:10.​1007/​s10549-010-1118-2 PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Setz-Pels W, Duijm LE, Coebergh JW, Rutten M, Nederend J, Voogd AC (2013) Re-attendance after false-positive screening mammography: a population-based study in the Netherlands. Br J Cancer. doi:10.1038/bjc.2013.573 PubMed Setz-Pels W, Duijm LE, Coebergh JW, Rutten M, Nederend J, Voogd AC (2013) Re-attendance after false-positive screening mammography: a population-based study in the Netherlands. Br J Cancer. doi:10.​1038/​bjc.​2013.​573 PubMed
9.
go back to reference Alamo-Junquera D, Murta-Nascimento C, Macia F, Bare M, Galceran J, Ascunce N, Zubizarreta R, Salas D, Roman R, Castells X, Sala M (2012) Effect of false-positive results on reattendance at breast cancer screening programmes in Spain. Eur J Public Health 22(3):404–408. doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckr057 PubMedCrossRef Alamo-Junquera D, Murta-Nascimento C, Macia F, Bare M, Galceran J, Ascunce N, Zubizarreta R, Salas D, Roman R, Castells X, Sala M (2012) Effect of false-positive results on reattendance at breast cancer screening programmes in Spain. Eur J Public Health 22(3):404–408. doi:10.​1093/​eurpub/​ckr057 PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Nederend J, Duijm LE, Louwman MW, Groenewoud JH, Donkers-van Rossum AB, Voogd AC (2012) Impact of transition from analog screening mammography to digital screening mammography on screening outcome in The Netherlands: a population-based study. Ann Oncol 23(12):3098–3103. doi:10.1093/annonc/mds146 PubMedCrossRef Nederend J, Duijm LE, Louwman MW, Groenewoud JH, Donkers-van Rossum AB, Voogd AC (2012) Impact of transition from analog screening mammography to digital screening mammography on screening outcome in The Netherlands: a population-based study. Ann Oncol 23(12):3098–3103. doi:10.​1093/​annonc/​mds146 PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Bluekens AM, Karssemeijer N, Beijerinck D, Deurenberg JJ, van Engen RE, Broeders MJ, den Heeten GJ (2010) Consequences of digital mammography in population-based breast cancer screening: initial changes and long-term impact on referral rates. Eur Radiol 20(9):2067–2073. doi:10.1007/s00330-010-1786-7 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Bluekens AM, Karssemeijer N, Beijerinck D, Deurenberg JJ, van Engen RE, Broeders MJ, den Heeten GJ (2010) Consequences of digital mammography in population-based breast cancer screening: initial changes and long-term impact on referral rates. Eur Radiol 20(9):2067–2073. doi:10.​1007/​s00330-010-1786-7 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference van Luijt PA, Fracheboud J, Heijnsdijk EA, den Heeten GJ, de Koning HJ (2013) Nation-wide data on screening performance during the transition to digital mammography: observations in 6 million screens. Eur J Cancer. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2013.06.020 PubMed van Luijt PA, Fracheboud J, Heijnsdijk EA, den Heeten GJ, de Koning HJ (2013) Nation-wide data on screening performance during the transition to digital mammography: observations in 6 million screens. Eur J Cancer. doi:10.​1016/​j.​ejca.​2013.​06.​020 PubMed
15.
go back to reference Fracheboud J, de Koning HJ, Boer R, Groenewoud JH, Verbeek AL, Broeders MJ, van Ineveld BM, Hendriks JH, de Bruyn AE, Holland R, van der Maas PJ (2001) Nationwide breast cancer screening programme fully implemented in The Netherlands. Breast 10(1):6–11. doi:10.1054/brst.2000.0212 PubMedCrossRef Fracheboud J, de Koning HJ, Boer R, Groenewoud JH, Verbeek AL, Broeders MJ, van Ineveld BM, Hendriks JH, de Bruyn AE, Holland R, van der Maas PJ (2001) Nationwide breast cancer screening programme fully implemented in The Netherlands. Breast 10(1):6–11. doi:10.​1054/​brst.​2000.​0212 PubMedCrossRef
16.
17.
go back to reference Maes RM, Dronkers DJ, Hendriks JH, Thijssen MA, Nab HW (1997) Do non-specific minimal signs in a biennial mammographic breast cancer screening programme need further diagnostic assessment? Br J Radiol 70:34–38PubMed Maes RM, Dronkers DJ, Hendriks JH, Thijssen MA, Nab HW (1997) Do non-specific minimal signs in a biennial mammographic breast cancer screening programme need further diagnostic assessment? Br J Radiol 70:34–38PubMed
19.
go back to reference Sobin LH, Wittekind C (2002) TNM classification of malignant tumours. Wiley-Liss, New York Sobin LH, Wittekind C (2002) TNM classification of malignant tumours. Wiley-Liss, New York
20.
go back to reference Edge S, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A (eds) (2010) AJCC cancer staging manual, 7th edn. Springer, New York Edge S, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A (eds) (2010) AJCC cancer staging manual, 7th edn. Springer, New York
23.
go back to reference Feeley L, Kiernan D, Mooney T, Flanagan F, Hargaden G, Kell M, Stokes M, Kennedy M (2011) Digital mammography in a screening programme and its implications for pathology: a comparative study. J Clin Pathol 64(3):215–219. doi:10.1136/jcp.2010.085860 PubMedCrossRef Feeley L, Kiernan D, Mooney T, Flanagan F, Hargaden G, Kell M, Stokes M, Kennedy M (2011) Digital mammography in a screening programme and its implications for pathology: a comparative study. J Clin Pathol 64(3):215–219. doi:10.​1136/​jcp.​2010.​085860 PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Del Turco MR, Mantellini P, Ciatto S, Bonardi R, Martinelli F, Lazzari B, Houssami N (2007) Full-field digital versus screen-film mammography: comparative accuracy in concurrent screening cohorts. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189(4):860–866. doi:10.2214/AJR.07.2303 PubMedCrossRef Del Turco MR, Mantellini P, Ciatto S, Bonardi R, Martinelli F, Lazzari B, Houssami N (2007) Full-field digital versus screen-film mammography: comparative accuracy in concurrent screening cohorts. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189(4):860–866. doi:10.​2214/​AJR.​07.​2303 PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Hambly NM, McNicholas MM, Phelan N, Hargaden GC, O’Doherty A, Flanagan FL (2009) Comparison of digital mammography and screen-film mammography in breast cancer screening: a review in the Irish breast screening program. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193(4):1010–1018. doi:10.2214/AJR.08.2157 PubMedCrossRef Hambly NM, McNicholas MM, Phelan N, Hargaden GC, O’Doherty A, Flanagan FL (2009) Comparison of digital mammography and screen-film mammography in breast cancer screening: a review in the Irish breast screening program. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193(4):1010–1018. doi:10.​2214/​AJR.​08.​2157 PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Karssemeijer N, Bluekens AM, Beijerinck D, Deurenberg JJ, Beekman M, Visser R, van Engen R, Bartels-Kortland A, Broeders MJ (2009) Breast cancer screening results 5 years after introduction of digital mammography in a population-based screening program. Radiology 253(2):353–358. doi:10.1148/radiol.2532090225 PubMedCrossRef Karssemeijer N, Bluekens AM, Beijerinck D, Deurenberg JJ, Beekman M, Visser R, van Engen R, Bartels-Kortland A, Broeders MJ (2009) Breast cancer screening results 5 years after introduction of digital mammography in a population-based screening program. Radiology 253(2):353–358. doi:10.​1148/​radiol.​2532090225 PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Visser R, Veldkamp WJ, Beijerinck D, Bun PA, Deurenberg JJ, Imhof-Tas MW, Schuur KH, Snoeren MM, den Heeten GJ, Karssemeijer N, Broeders MJ (2012) Increase in perceived case suspiciousness due to local contrast optimisation in digital screening mammography. Eur Radiol 22(4):908–914. doi:10.1007/s00330-011-2320-2 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Visser R, Veldkamp WJ, Beijerinck D, Bun PA, Deurenberg JJ, Imhof-Tas MW, Schuur KH, Snoeren MM, den Heeten GJ, Karssemeijer N, Broeders MJ (2012) Increase in perceived case suspiciousness due to local contrast optimisation in digital screening mammography. Eur Radiol 22(4):908–914. doi:10.​1007/​s00330-011-2320-2 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Re-attendance at biennial screening mammography following a repeated false positive recall
Authors
Elisabeth G. Klompenhouwer
Lucien E. M. Duijm
Adri C. Voogd
Gerard J. den Heeten
Luc J. Strobbe
Marieke W. Louwman
Jan Willem Coebergh
Dick Venderink
Mireille J. M. Broeders
Publication date
01-06-2014
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 2/2014
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-014-2959-x

Other articles of this Issue 2/2014

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 2/2014 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