Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 1/2024

Open Access 29-01-2024 | Mammography | Epidemiology

Comparisons of assessment pathways after abnormal mammography screening in Denmark, Norway, and Spain

Authors: Susanne Fogh Jørgensen, Silje Sagstad, Javier Louro, Marta Román, Xavier Castells, Solveig Hofvind, Sisse Njor

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 1/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To ensure high-quality screening programmes and effective utilization of resources, it is important to monitor how cancer detection is affected by different strategies performed at recall assessment. This study aimed to describe procedures performed at recall assessment and compare and evaluate the performance of the assessment in Denmark, Norway, and Spain in terms of screen-detected cancer (SDC) and interval cancer (IC) rates.

Methods

We included women aged 50–69 years from Denmark, Norway, and Spain, who were recalled for assessment after screening mammography, and recorded all procedures performed during six months after diagnosis, and the timing of the procedures. Women were followed for two years and screen-detected and interval cancer, and sensitivity of recall was calculated and compared.

Results

In total, data from 24,645 Danish, 30,050 Norwegian, and 41,809 Spanish women were included in the study. Most of the women had some assessment within 2 months in all three countries. SDC rates were higher in Denmark (0.57) and Norway (0.60) compared to Spain (0.38), as were the IC rates, i.e. 0.25 and 0.18 vs. 0.12, respectively. The sensitivity of the diagnostic follow-up was somewhat higher in Denmark (98.3%) and Norway (98.2%), compared to Spain (95.4%), but when excluding non-invasive assessment pathways, the sensitivities were comparable.

Conclusion

This comparison study showed variation in the assessment procedures used in the three countries as well as the SDC and IC rates and the sensitivity of recall.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Altobelli E, Lattanzi A (2014) Breast cancer in European Union: an update of screening programmes as of March 2014 (review). Int J Oncol 45(5):1785–1792CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Altobelli E, Lattanzi A (2014) Breast cancer in European Union: an update of screening programmes as of March 2014 (review). Int J Oncol 45(5):1785–1792CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
go back to reference Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, Törnberg S, Holland R, von Karsa L, et al. (2006) European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. 4th edn, p 416 Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, Törnberg S, Holland R, von Karsa L, et al. (2006) European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. 4th edn, p 416
3.
go back to reference Olivotto IA, Gomi A, Bancej C, Brisson J, Tonita J, Kan L et al (2002) Influence of delay to diagnosis on prognostic indicators of screen-detected breast carcinoma. Cancer 94(8):2143–2150CrossRefPubMed Olivotto IA, Gomi A, Bancej C, Brisson J, Tonita J, Kan L et al (2002) Influence of delay to diagnosis on prognostic indicators of screen-detected breast carcinoma. Cancer 94(8):2143–2150CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Doubeni CA, Gabler NB, Wheeler CM, McCarthy AM, Castle PE, Halm EA, et al. (2018) Timely follow-up of positive cancer screening results: a systematic review and recommendations from the PROSPR Consortium. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians Doubeni CA, Gabler NB, Wheeler CM, McCarthy AM, Castle PE, Halm EA, et al. (2018) Timely follow-up of positive cancer screening results: a systematic review and recommendations from the PROSPR Consortium. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians
5.
go back to reference Hafslund B, Nortvedt MW (2009) Mammography screening from the perspective of quality of life: a review of the literature. Scand J Caring Sci 23(3):539–548CrossRefPubMed Hafslund B, Nortvedt MW (2009) Mammography screening from the perspective of quality of life: a review of the literature. Scand J Caring Sci 23(3):539–548CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Muratov S, Canelo-Aybar C, Tarride J-E, Alonso-Coello P, Dimitrova N, Borisch B et al (2020) Monitoring and evaluation of breast cancer screening programmes: selecting candidate performance indicators. BMC Cancer 20(1):795CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Muratov S, Canelo-Aybar C, Tarride J-E, Alonso-Coello P, Dimitrova N, Borisch B et al (2020) Monitoring and evaluation of breast cancer screening programmes: selecting candidate performance indicators. BMC Cancer 20(1):795CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Dansk Kvalitetsdatabase for Mammografiscreening (2007) Mammografiscreening i Danmark. Kliniske Retningslinjer [Mammography screening in Denmark. Clinical guidelines]. Contract No.: Report Dansk Kvalitetsdatabase for Mammografiscreening (2007) Mammografiscreening i Danmark. Kliniske Retningslinjer [Mammography screening in Denmark. Clinical guidelines]. Contract No.: Report
11.
go back to reference Hofvind S, Geller B, Vacek PM, Thoresen S, Skaane P (2007) Using the European guidelines to evaluate the Norwegian breast cancer screening program. Eur J Epidemiol 22(7):447–455CrossRefPubMed Hofvind S, Geller B, Vacek PM, Thoresen S, Skaane P (2007) Using the European guidelines to evaluate the Norwegian breast cancer screening program. Eur J Epidemiol 22(7):447–455CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Hofvind S, Skaane P, Elmore JG, Sebuødegård S, Hoff SR, Lee CI (2014) Mammographic performance in a population-based screening program: before, during, and after the transition from screen-film to full-field digital mammography. Radiology 272(1):52–62CrossRefPubMed Hofvind S, Skaane P, Elmore JG, Sebuødegård S, Hoff SR, Lee CI (2014) Mammographic performance in a population-based screening program: before, during, and after the transition from screen-film to full-field digital mammography. Radiology 272(1):52–62CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Bjørnson EWHÅS, Sagstad S, Larsen M, Thy J, Mangerud G, Ertzaas AK, Hofvind S (2022) Breast Screen Norway: 25 years of organized screening. Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo Bjørnson EWHÅS, Sagstad S, Larsen M, Thy J, Mangerud G, Ertzaas AK, Hofvind S (2022) Breast Screen Norway: 25 years of organized screening. Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo
14.
go back to reference Ascunce N, Salas D, Zubizarreta R, Almazán R, Ibáñez J, Ederra M (2010) Cancer screening in Spain. Ann Oncol 21(Suppl 3):43–51CrossRef Ascunce N, Salas D, Zubizarreta R, Almazán R, Ibáñez J, Ederra M (2010) Cancer screening in Spain. Ann Oncol 21(Suppl 3):43–51CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Sickles EDO CB, LW et al. (2013) ACR BI-RADS® mammography. In: ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast imaging reporting and data system. American College of Radiology, Reston Sickles EDO CB, LW et al. (2013) ACR BI-RADS® mammography. In: ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast imaging reporting and data system. American College of Radiology, Reston
16.
18.
go back to reference Bjerregaard B, Larsen OB (2011) The Danish Pathology Register. Scand J Public Health. 39(7_suppl):72–74CrossRefPubMed Bjerregaard B, Larsen OB (2011) The Danish Pathology Register. Scand J Public Health. 39(7_suppl):72–74CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Schmidt M, Schmidt SAJ, Sandegaard JL, Ehrenstein V, Pedersen L, Sorensen HT (2015) The Danish national patient registry: a review of content, data quality, and research potential (Report). Clin Epidemiol 7:449CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Schmidt M, Schmidt SAJ, Sandegaard JL, Ehrenstein V, Pedersen L, Sorensen HT (2015) The Danish national patient registry: a review of content, data quality, and research potential (Report). Clin Epidemiol 7:449CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
go back to reference Schmidt M, Pedersen L, Sørensen HT (2014) The Danish civil registration system as a tool in epidemiology. Eur J Epidemiol 29(8):541–549CrossRefPubMed Schmidt M, Pedersen L, Sørensen HT (2014) The Danish civil registration system as a tool in epidemiology. Eur J Epidemiol 29(8):541–549CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Román M, Louro J, Posso M, Vidal C, Bargalló X, Vázquez I et al (2022) Long-Term Risk of Breast Cancer after Diagnosis of Benign Breast Disease by Screening Mammography. Int J Environ Res Public Health 19(5):2625CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Román M, Louro J, Posso M, Vidal C, Bargalló X, Vázquez I et al (2022) Long-Term Risk of Breast Cancer after Diagnosis of Benign Breast Disease by Screening Mammography. Int J Environ Res Public Health 19(5):2625CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
go back to reference Louro J, Román M, Posso M, Comerma L, Vidal C, Saladié F et al (2020) Differences in breast cancer risk after benign breast disease by type of screening diagnosis. Breast 54:343–348CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Louro J, Román M, Posso M, Comerma L, Vidal C, Saladié F et al (2020) Differences in breast cancer risk after benign breast disease by type of screening diagnosis. Breast 54:343–348CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Quan ML, Shumak RS, Majpruz V, Holloway CMD, O’Malley FP, Chiarelli AM (2012) Improving work-up of the abnormal mammogram through organized assessment: results from the Ontario breast screening program. J Oncol Pract 8(2):107–112CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Quan ML, Shumak RS, Majpruz V, Holloway CMD, O’Malley FP, Chiarelli AM (2012) Improving work-up of the abnormal mammogram through organized assessment: results from the Ontario breast screening program. J Oncol Pract 8(2):107–112CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
27.
go back to reference Ganry O, Peng J, Dubreuil A (2004) Influence of abnormal screens on delays and prognostic indicators of screen-detected breast carcinoma. J Med Screen 11(1):28–31CrossRefPubMed Ganry O, Peng J, Dubreuil A (2004) Influence of abnormal screens on delays and prognostic indicators of screen-detected breast carcinoma. J Med Screen 11(1):28–31CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Danckert BFJ, Engholm G , Hansen HL, Johannesen TB, Khan S, Køtlum JE, Ólafsdóttir E, Schmidt LKH, Virtanen A and Storm HH (2019) NORDCAN: cancer incidence, mortality, prevalence and survival in the Nordic Countries, Version 8.2 (26.03.2019) [homepage on the internet]. Association of the Nordic Cancer Registries. Danish Cancer Society. Available from: http://www.ancr.nu Danckert BFJ, Engholm G , Hansen HL, Johannesen TB, Khan S, Køtlum JE, Ólafsdóttir E, Schmidt LKH, Virtanen A and Storm HH (2019) NORDCAN: cancer incidence, mortality, prevalence and survival in the Nordic Countries, Version 8.2 (26.03.2019) [homepage on the internet]. Association of the Nordic Cancer Registries. Danish Cancer Society. Available from: http://​www.​ancr.​nu
29.
go back to reference Ferlay J EM, Lam F, Colombet M, Mery L, Piñeros M, Znaor A, Soerjomataram I, Bray F (2020) Global cancer observatory: cancer today [homepage on the internet]. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France [Available from: https://gco.iarc.fr/today Ferlay J EM, Lam F, Colombet M, Mery L, Piñeros M, Znaor A, Soerjomataram I, Bray F (2020) Global cancer observatory: cancer today [homepage on the internet]. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France [Available from: https://​gco.​iarc.​fr/​today
30.
go back to reference Ciatto S, Houssami N, Ambrogetti D, Bonardi R, Collini G, Del Turco MR (2007) Minority report—false negative breast assessment in women recalled for suspicious screening mammography: imaging and pathological features, and associated delay in diagnosis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 105(1):37–43CrossRefPubMed Ciatto S, Houssami N, Ambrogetti D, Bonardi R, Collini G, Del Turco MR (2007) Minority report—false negative breast assessment in women recalled for suspicious screening mammography: imaging and pathological features, and associated delay in diagnosis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 105(1):37–43CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference von Euler-Chelpin M, Kuchiki M, Vejborg I (2014) Increased risk of breast cancer in women with false-positive test: the role of misclassification. Cancer Epidemiol 38(5):619–622CrossRef von Euler-Chelpin M, Kuchiki M, Vejborg I (2014) Increased risk of breast cancer in women with false-positive test: the role of misclassification. Cancer Epidemiol 38(5):619–622CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Comparisons of assessment pathways after abnormal mammography screening in Denmark, Norway, and Spain
Authors
Susanne Fogh Jørgensen
Silje Sagstad
Javier Louro
Marta Román
Xavier Castells
Solveig Hofvind
Sisse Njor
Publication date
29-01-2024
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 1/2024
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-023-07219-0

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 1/2024 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