Table 4 Screening detection measuresa.
From: Health benefits and harms of mammography screening in older women (75+ years)—a systematic review
Study Reference | Comparison Made | Outcome 1 | Data | Outcome 2 | Data |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Cancer detection rates | |||||
Cate [22] | No comparison | Cancer detection rate | 4.9 per 1000 screening examinations (10 of 2057 patients) | ||
Destounis [24] | No comparison | Cancer detection | 8.4 per 1000 exams | ||
Hartman [27] | No comparison | Cancer detection rate | 5.9 per 1000 screens | ||
Richman [50] | Subsequent screen v no subsequent screen | Cumulative incidence of breast cancer per 100 women (95%CI) | 4.85 (4.57–5.15) v 2.56 (2.20–2.97) | Risk difference | 2.29 (1.74–2.81) |
Smith-Bindman [42] | No screening | RR of breast cancer | 3.6 (3.3–4.0) | ||
Upneja [43] | 67–74 vs 75+ | Total cancer diagnosis | 7.3(6.9–7.6) vs 9.4(8.8–9.9) per 1000 women screened | ||
Invasive detection rates | |||||
Bennett [18] | 70–74 v 75 and older | Invasive cancers | 1073 (12.4/1000) vs 815 (15.3/1000) | Invasive cancers <15 mm | A: 537 (6.2/1000) B: 395 (7.4/1000) |
Braithwaite [21] | 66–74 vs 75–89 | Invasive cancers | Charlson Score=0 & 1-year screen interval: 81.6% vs 81.1%; Charlson Score=0 & 2-year screen interval: 80.1% vs 84.8%; Charlson Score=1 & 1-year screen interval: 77.8% vs 86.0%; Charlson Score=1 & 2-year screen interval: 76.9% vs 86.4%. | Invasive cancer number | All cancers: 1346 vs 1096. Charlson Score=0 & 1-year screen interval: 672 vs 490; Charlson Score=0 & 2-year screen interval: 323 vs 308; Charlson Score=1 & 1-year screen interval: 231 vs 190; Charlson Score=1 & 2-year screen interval: 120 vs 108. |
Demb [23] | 66–74 vs 75–84 vs 85–94 | 10-year cumulative incidence of invasive breast cancer | 4.0% (3.9–4.1%) vs 3.6% (3.5–3.8%) vs 2.7% (2.4–3.0%) | 10-year risk of invasive breast cancer by Charlson Comorbidity index (CCI) | Ages 66–74: CCI0: 4.0% (3.9–4.2%), CCI1: 4.0% (3.7–4.2%), CCI ≥ 2: 3.9% (3.5–4.3%); Ages 75–84: CCI0: 3.7% (3.5–3.9%), CCI1: 3.4% (3.1–3.7%), CCI ≥ 2: 3.4% (2.9–3.9%); Ages 85–94: CCI0: 2.7% (2.3–3.1%), CCI1: 2.9% (2.2–3.7%), CCI ≥ 2: 2.1% (1.3–3.0%). |
Destounis [24] | No comparison | Invasive cancers | 82% of all malignancy. 63% were grade 2 or 3. | ||
El-Zaemey [4] | 65–69 v 70–74 v 75 and older | Invasive screen-detected cancer (per 1000 screens; 95% CI) | 6.5 (5.8–7.4) v 8.1 (7.1–9.3) v 11.4 (9.3-13.9) | ||
Erbas [25] | 40–49 vs 50–69 vs 70–74 vs 75 and older | Invasive breast cancer rate (per 1000 women screened) | 2.49 vs 4.07 vs 5.46 vs 5.14 | ||
Richman [50] | Subsequent screen v no subsequent screen | Localised invasive breast cancer incidence per 100 women (95%CI) | 3.15 (2.95–3.38) v 1.50 (1.21–1.86) | Risk difference | 1.65 (1.21–2.03) |
Smith-Bindman [42] | No screening | RR of Breast cancer | Local:4.4 (3.9–5.0) Regional:3.1 (2.5–3.7) Metastatic: 0.69(0.46–1.0) | ||
DCIS rate | |||||
Bennett [18] | 70–74 v 75 and older | In Situ cancer | 227 (2.6 per 1000) vs 139 (2.6 per 1000) | ||
Braithwaite [21] | 66–74 vs 75–89 | DCIS | Charlson Score=0 & 1-year screen interval: 18.4% vs 18.9%; Charlson Score=0 & 2-year screen interval: 19.9% v 15.2% Charlson Score=1 & 1-year screen interval: 22.2% v 14.0% Charlson Score=1 & 2-year screen interval: 23.1% v 13.6% | ||
Demb [23] | 66-74 vs 75-84 vs 85-94 | 10-year cumulative incidence of DCIS | 1.0% (0.9–1.0%) vs 0.7% (0.6–0.8%) vs 0.4% (0.3–0.5%) | ||
El-Zaemey [4] | 65-69 v 70–74 v 75 and older | In situ screen-detected cancer (per 1000 screens; 95% CI) | 1.6 (1.3–2.1) v 2.0 (1.5-2.7) v 1.3 (0.7-2.2) | ||
Erbas [25] | 40–49 vs 50–69 vs 70–74 vs 75 and older | DCIS rate (per 1000 women screened) | 0.83 vs 0.82 vs 0.87 vs 0.97 | ||
Richman [50] | Subsequent screen v no subsequent screen | In situ breast cancer incidence per 100 women (95%CI) | 0.79 (0.68–0.93) – 0.15 (0.07–0.29) | Risk difference | 0.64 (0.46–0.79) |
Smith-Bindman [42] | No screening | RR of DCIS | 4.9 (3.5-6.9) | ||
Interval cancer rates | |||||
El-Zaemey [4] | 65–69 v 70–74 v 75 and older | Invasive interval cancer (per 1000 screens; 95% CI) | 1.7 (1.3–2.2) v 2.2 (1.8–2.9) v 1.5 (0.9-2.5) | ||
PPV | |||||
Bennett [18] | 70–74 v 75 and older | PPV | 31.2%, vs 32.3% | ||
Garcia-Albeniz [26] | Continue vs stop screening | PPV | 41.5% vs 48.4% | ||
Hartman [27] | No comparison | PPV2 | 40.6% (26/64) | PPV3 | 43.3% (26/60) |
