Assessing the effectiveness of a mammography screening service

Background: Trials have shown that mammography screening reduces mortality and probably decreases morbidity related to breast cancer. Methods: We assessed whether the major mammography service in Western Australia (BreastScreen WA) is likely to reduce mortality by comparing prognostic variables between screen-detected and other cases of breast cancer diagnosed in 1999. We assessed likely reductions in morbidity by comparing treatments received by these two groups. To confirm mortality and morbidity reduction, we also compared prognostic variables and treatments with targets. Information on demographic variables, tumour characteristics at presentation and treatments were collected from medical records for all incident cases of breast cancer in Western Australia in 1999. We matched cases with the Western Australian Cancer Registry records to determine which cases had been detected by BreastScreen WA. Results: BreastScreen WA achieved the targets for mortality reduction. Tumours detected by BreastScreen WA were smaller in size, less likely to have vascular invasion, of lower histological grade and were more likely to be ductal carcinoma in situ alone without invasive carcinoma. Oestrogen receptor status was more likely to be positive, the difference in progesterone status was not significant, and lymph node involvement tended to be lower. BreastScreen WA patients were treated more often with local therapy and less often with systemic therapy, and the proportion of patients treated with breast-conserving surgery was close to the target for minimizing morbidity in breast cancer. Conclusion: Mammographic detection of breast cancer by BreastScreen WA is associated with reduced breast cancer morbidity and a more favourable prognosis.

Trusting technology: Women aged 40-49 years participating in screening for breast cancer - an exploratory study

Objective: This paper reports key findings from an exploratory study of factors associated with women's decision to participate in mass mammography screening in Tasmania. In particular, we explored factors that contribute to the choice to participate in screening by women who are outside the primary target group, and for whom the evidence of benefit remains contentious. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a small sample of women aged between 40 and 49 years in rural Tasmania who had participated in mammography screening. Results: Key ideas that appeared to shape participation included the fear of breast cancer, trust in technology, and taking responsibility for health. Information provision is also an important factor in shaping participation patterns. Conclusions and implications: In order to facilitate informed consent, information provision in this area should take account of the dominant ideas that shape the decision to participate in breast cancer screening.

Using fear appeals to promote cancer screening - are we scaring the wrong people?

There is debate regarding the use of fear appeals (emphasizing severe threats to health) in social marketing, to encourage preventive behaviours, such as screening for breast cancer. While it has been found that fear appeals may result in attitude and behaviour change there is also the risk of inciting inappropriate levels of fear, motivating the wrong audience or instigating maladaptive behaviour in the target group such as denial or defensive avoidance. This study examined the impact of an experimental threat manipulation for mammography screening on a group of women in regional Australia. The study found that varying the level of threat had no impact on stated intentions of the women to undergo mammographic screening. However, it also found that high-threat messages resulted in stronger negative emotional reactions and greater perceived susceptibility among younger women who are not the target group for screening in Australia. The results of this study emphasize the importance of limiting the use of high levels of threat in social marketing campaigns, and ensuring that campaigns are appropriately designed to specifically impact upon and motivate the target group. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS)

Background Women genetically predisposed to breast cancer often develop the disease at a young age when dense breast tissue reduces the sensitivity of X-ray mammography. Our aim was, therefore, to compare contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE MRI) with mammography for screening. Methods We did a prospective multicentre cohort study in 649 women aged 35-49 years with a strong family history of breast cancer or a high probability of a BRCA1, BRCA2, or TP53 mutation. We recruited participants from 22 centres in the UK, and offered the women annual screening with CE MRI and mammography for 2-7 years. Findings We diagnosed 35 cancers in the 649 women screened with both mammography and CE MRI (1881 screens): 19 by CE MRI only, six by mammography only, and eight by both, with two interval cases. Sensitivity was significantly higher for CE MRI (77%, 95% CI 60-90) than for mammography (40%, 24-58; p=0.01), and was 94% (81-99) when both methods were used. Specificity was 93% (92-95) for mammography, 81% (80-83) for CE MRI (p

Cost-effectiveness of screening with contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging vs X-ray mammography of women at a high familial risk of breast cancer

Contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE MRI) is the most sensitive tool for screening women who are at high familial risk of breast cancer. Our aim in this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of X-ray mammography (XRM), CE MRI or both strategies combined. In total, 649 women were enrolled in the MARIBS study and screened with both CE MRI and mammography resulting in 1881 screens and 1-7 individual annual screening events. Women aged 35-49 years at high risk of breast cancer, either because they have a strong family history of breast cancer or are tested carriers of a BRCA1, BRCA2 or TP53 mutation or are at a 50% risk of having inherited such a mutation, were recruited from 22 centres and offered annual MRI and XRM for between 2 and 7 years. Information on the number and type of further investigations was collected and specifically calculated unit costs were used to calculate the incremental cost per cancer detected. The numbers of cancer detected was 13 for mammography, 27 for CE MRI and 33 for mammography and CE MRI combined. In the subgroup of BRCA1 (BRCA2) mutation carriers or of women having a first degree relative with a mutation in BRCA1 (BRCA2) corresponding numbers were 3 (6), 12 (7) and 12 (11), respectively. For all women, the incremental cost per cancer detected with CE MRI and mammography combined was 28 pound 284 compared to mammography. When only BRCA1 or the BRCA2 groups were considered, this cost would be reduced to 11 pound 731 (CE MRI vs mammography) and 15 pound 302 (CE MRI and mammography vs mammography). Results were most sensitive to the unit cost estimate for a CE MRI screening test. Contrast-enhanced MRI might be a cost-effective screening modality for women at high risk, particularly for the BRCA1 and BRCA2 subgroups. Further work is needed to assess the impact of screening on mortality and health-related quality of life.

Validity of self-reported skin screening histories

Screening by whole-body clinical skin examination may improve early diagnosis of melanoma and reduce mortality, but objective scientific evidence of this is lacking. As part of a randomized controlled trial of population screening for melanoma in Queensland, Australia, the authors assessed the validity of self-reported history of whole-body skin examination and factors associated with accuracy of recall among 2,704 participants in 2001. Approximately half of the participants were known to have undergone whole-body skin examination within the past 3 years at skin screening clinics conducted as part of the randomized trial. All positive and negative self-reports were compared with screening clinic records. Where possible, reports of skin examinations conducted outside the clinics were compared with private medical records. The validity of self-reports of whole-body skin examination in the past 3 years was high: Concordance between self-reports and medical records was 93.7%, sensitivity was 92.0%, and specificity was 96.3%. Concordance was lower (74.3%) for self-reports of examinations conducted in the past 12 months, and there was evidence of telescoping in recall for this more recent time frame. In multivariate analysis, women and younger participants more accurately recalled their history of skin examinations. Participants with a history of melanoma did not differ from other participants in their accuracy of recall.

A Test of Performance of Breast MRI Interpretation in a Multicentre Screening Study

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the consistency and performance of radiologists interpreting breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations. Materials and Methods: Two test sets of eight cases comprising cancers, benign disease, technical problems and parenchymal enhancement were prepared from two manufacturers' equipment (X and Y) and reported by 15 radiologists using the recording form and scoring system of the UK MRI breast screening study [(MAgnetic Resonance Imaging in Breast Screening (MARIBS)]. Variations in assessments of morphology, kinetic scores and diagnosis were measured by assessing intraobserver and interobserver variability and agreement. The sensitivity and specificity of reporting performances was determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Results: Intraobserver variation was seen in 13 (27.7%) of 47 of the radiologists' conclusions (four technical and seven pathological differences). Substantial interobserver variation was observed in the scores recorded for morphology, pattern of enhancement, quantification of enhancement and washout pattern. The overall sensitivity of breast MRI was high [88.6%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 77.4-94.7%], combined with a specificity of 69.2% (95% CI 60.5-76.7%). The sensitivities were similar for the two test sets (P=.3), but the specificity was significantly higher for the Manufacturer X dataset (P

Clinical outcomes from skin screening clinics within a community-based melanoma screening program

Background : Within a randomized trial of population screening for melanoma, primary care physicians conducted whole-body skin examinations and referred all patients with suspect lesions to their own doctor for further treatment. Objective: Our aim was to describe characteristics of skin screening participants, clinical screening diagnoses, management following referral, and specificity and yield of screening examinations. Methods: Information collected from consent forms, referral forms, and histopathological reports of lesions that had been excised or undergone biopsy was analyzed by means of descriptive statistics. Results: A total of 16,383 whole-body skin examinations resulted in 2302 referrals (14.1% overall; 15.5% men, 18.2% >= 50 years of age) for 4129 suspect lesions (including 222 suspected melanoma, 1101 suspected basal cell carcinomas [BCCs], 265 suspected squamous cell carcinomas [SCCs]). Histopathologic results were available for 94.8% of 1417 lesions excised and confirmed 33 melanomas (23 in men; 24 in participants ? 50 years of age), 259 BCCs, and 97 SCCs. The probability of detecting skin cancer of any type within the program was 2.4%. The estimated specificity of whole-body skin examinations for melanoma was 86.1% (95% confidence interval = 85.6-86.6). The positive predictive value (number of confirmed/number of lesions excised or biopsied x 100) for melanoma was 2.5%, 19.3% for BCC, and 7.2% for SCC (overall positive predictive value for skin cancer, 28.9%). Limitations: Follow-up of participants with a negative screening examination has not been conducted for the present investigation. Conclusions: The rate of skin cancer detected per 100 patients screened was higher than previously reported and men and attendees older than 50 years more frequently received a referral and diagnosis of melanoma. The specificity for detection of melanoma through whole-body skin examination by a primary care physician was comparable to that of other screening tests, including mammography.