A simple way to measure the burden of interval cancers in breast cancer screening

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

A simple way to measure the burden of interval cancers in breast cancer screening. / Andersen, Sune Bangsbøll; Törnberg, Sven; Lynge, Elsebeth; Von Euler-Chelpin, My; Njor, Sisse Helle.

In: B M C Cancer, Vol. 14, 782, 2014, p. 1-8.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Andersen, SB, Törnberg, S, Lynge, E, Von Euler-Chelpin, M & Njor, SH 2014, 'A simple way to measure the burden of interval cancers in breast cancer screening', B M C Cancer, vol. 14, 782, pp. 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-14-782

APA

Andersen, S. B., Törnberg, S., Lynge, E., Von Euler-Chelpin, M., & Njor, S. H. (2014). A simple way to measure the burden of interval cancers in breast cancer screening. B M C Cancer, 14, 1-8. [782]. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-14-782

Vancouver

Andersen SB, Törnberg S, Lynge E, Von Euler-Chelpin M, Njor SH. A simple way to measure the burden of interval cancers in breast cancer screening. B M C Cancer. 2014;14:1-8. 782. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-14-782

Author

Andersen, Sune Bangsbøll ; Törnberg, Sven ; Lynge, Elsebeth ; Von Euler-Chelpin, My ; Njor, Sisse Helle. / A simple way to measure the burden of interval cancers in breast cancer screening. In: B M C Cancer. 2014 ; Vol. 14. pp. 1-8.

Bibtex

@article{5691961d5f8d4cc1a10ea7b319d100b1,
title = "A simple way to measure the burden of interval cancers in breast cancer screening",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: The sensitivity of a mammography program is normally evaluated by comparing the interval cancer rate to the expected breast cancer incidence without screening, i.e. the proportional interval cancer rate (PICR). The expected breast cancer incidence in absence of screening is, however, difficult to estimate when a program has been running for some time. As an alternative to the PICR we propose the interval cancer ratio ICR=intervalcancersintervalcancers+screendetectedcancers. We validated this simple measure by comparing it with the traditionally used PICR.METHOD: We undertook a systematic review and included studies: 1) covering a service screening program, 2) women aged 50-69 years, 3) observed data, 4) interval cancers, women screened, or interval cancer rate, screen detected cases, or screen detection rate, and 5) estimated breast cancer incidence rate of background population. This resulted in 5 papers describing 12 mammography screening programs.RESULTS: Covering initial screens only, the ICR varied from 0.10 to 0.28 while the PICR varied from 0.22 to 0.51. For subsequent screens only, the ICR varied from 0.22 to 0.37 and the PICR from 0.28 to 0.51. There was a strong positive correlation between the ICR and the PICR for initial screens (r = 0.81), but less so for subsequent screens (r = 0.65).CONCLUSION: This alternate measure seems to capture the burden of interval cancers just as well as the traditional PICR, without need for the increasingly difficult estimation of background incidence, making it a more accessible tool when evaluating mammography screening program performance.",
author = "Andersen, {Sune Bangsb{\o}ll} and Sven T{\"o}rnberg and Elsebeth Lynge and {Von Euler-Chelpin}, My and Njor, {Sisse Helle}",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1186/1471-2407-14-782",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "1--8",
journal = "B M C Cancer",
issn = "1471-2407",
publisher = "BioMed Central Ltd.",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - A simple way to measure the burden of interval cancers in breast cancer screening

AU - Andersen, Sune Bangsbøll

AU - Törnberg, Sven

AU - Lynge, Elsebeth

AU - Von Euler-Chelpin, My

AU - Njor, Sisse Helle

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - BACKGROUND: The sensitivity of a mammography program is normally evaluated by comparing the interval cancer rate to the expected breast cancer incidence without screening, i.e. the proportional interval cancer rate (PICR). The expected breast cancer incidence in absence of screening is, however, difficult to estimate when a program has been running for some time. As an alternative to the PICR we propose the interval cancer ratio ICR=intervalcancersintervalcancers+screendetectedcancers. We validated this simple measure by comparing it with the traditionally used PICR.METHOD: We undertook a systematic review and included studies: 1) covering a service screening program, 2) women aged 50-69 years, 3) observed data, 4) interval cancers, women screened, or interval cancer rate, screen detected cases, or screen detection rate, and 5) estimated breast cancer incidence rate of background population. This resulted in 5 papers describing 12 mammography screening programs.RESULTS: Covering initial screens only, the ICR varied from 0.10 to 0.28 while the PICR varied from 0.22 to 0.51. For subsequent screens only, the ICR varied from 0.22 to 0.37 and the PICR from 0.28 to 0.51. There was a strong positive correlation between the ICR and the PICR for initial screens (r = 0.81), but less so for subsequent screens (r = 0.65).CONCLUSION: This alternate measure seems to capture the burden of interval cancers just as well as the traditional PICR, without need for the increasingly difficult estimation of background incidence, making it a more accessible tool when evaluating mammography screening program performance.

AB - BACKGROUND: The sensitivity of a mammography program is normally evaluated by comparing the interval cancer rate to the expected breast cancer incidence without screening, i.e. the proportional interval cancer rate (PICR). The expected breast cancer incidence in absence of screening is, however, difficult to estimate when a program has been running for some time. As an alternative to the PICR we propose the interval cancer ratio ICR=intervalcancersintervalcancers+screendetectedcancers. We validated this simple measure by comparing it with the traditionally used PICR.METHOD: We undertook a systematic review and included studies: 1) covering a service screening program, 2) women aged 50-69 years, 3) observed data, 4) interval cancers, women screened, or interval cancer rate, screen detected cases, or screen detection rate, and 5) estimated breast cancer incidence rate of background population. This resulted in 5 papers describing 12 mammography screening programs.RESULTS: Covering initial screens only, the ICR varied from 0.10 to 0.28 while the PICR varied from 0.22 to 0.51. For subsequent screens only, the ICR varied from 0.22 to 0.37 and the PICR from 0.28 to 0.51. There was a strong positive correlation between the ICR and the PICR for initial screens (r = 0.81), but less so for subsequent screens (r = 0.65).CONCLUSION: This alternate measure seems to capture the burden of interval cancers just as well as the traditional PICR, without need for the increasingly difficult estimation of background incidence, making it a more accessible tool when evaluating mammography screening program performance.

U2 - 10.1186/1471-2407-14-782

DO - 10.1186/1471-2407-14-782

M3 - Journal article

VL - 14

SP - 1

EP - 8

JO - B M C Cancer

JF - B M C Cancer

SN - 1471-2407

M1 - 782

ER -

ID: 135653035