Breast cancer screening.

A number of readers have asked for Bandolier's views on the recent breast cancer screening furore, in which a metaanalysis [1] asks some pertinent questions about whether screening is justified. It is difficult to jump into a complicated area and provide all the answers, but the paper itself is

worth reviewing because it makes one think.

Methods

The paper found eight randomised trials of breast screening with mammography. Authors of the original reports supplied more information when requested. In particular key questions were asked about whether the assignment methods were concealed so that no one could foresee whether the next woman would be screened or not. Again, randomisation should produce groups with identical characteristics, like age, so that the underlying risk of breast cancer was the same in screened and unscreened groups.

Results

Out of the eight randomised trials examining the effects of screening on over 450,000 women, in six randomisation failed to produce similar groups. These six had other deficiencies, with four having women unaccountably missing from the analysis.

The two trials which were adequately randomised failed to show any difference for deaths from breast cancer between screened and unscreened women (Table). Screening 10,500 women for breast cancer would produce one extra breast cancer death, with confidence intervals from preventing one death in 2100 women to causing one death in 1500 women.

The other six trials were much more favourable to screening (Figure 1), and consistent in the extent of benefit. Combined they had a number needed to screen to prevent one breast cancer death of 661 (506 to 950). Pooling all eight trials produced a number needed to screen to prevent one breast cancer death of 1040 (755 to 1672).

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Comment

The review makes an extremely good case that six of the breast cancer screening trials were flawed. In some cases, they seem so flawed as to be unreliable. This is particularly important when the absolute benefit of screening is so small. The percentage of women dying of breast cancer was always below 1% in the studies, and the difference in breast cancer death rates between studies (0.23 to 0.78%, average 0.43%) was many times greater than the difference effected by screening (-0.02 to 0.23%, average 0.1%). Figure 2 shows this graphically. It also suggests--it can be put no stronger than this--that reduced breast cancer deaths because of screening are only apparent when the baseline death rate is perhaps 0.4% or higher.

Giving the correct answer on breast screening is difficult. The evidence on overall reduction in death rate from randomised trials and from epidemiological studies falls short of showing much evidence of effect. The trials are suspect. The enthusiasts insist that the goalposts have moved, and that we may be playing a different game. The morbidity caused by numerous false positives remains relatively unstudied.

[FIGURE OMITTED]

Perhaps the best we can do for now is to tell women the truth and let them decide. Tell them that one woman in every 1000 who undergoes breast screening may be prevented from dying from breast cancer, but there may be no benefit at all. Women should demand the best unbiased evidence on the benefits and harms of screening.

Reference:

[1] PC Gotzsche, O Olsen. Is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable? Lancet 2000 355: 12934.

Table: Breast cancer deaths in screened and unscreened women

                Breast cancer deaths

               Unscreened   Screeened       Relative risk
Trials            (%)          (%)             (95% CI)

Adequately     177/66150    183/66013    1.04 (0.85 to 1.25)
randomised       (0.27)       (0.28)

Inadequately   725/142052   654/182179   0.75 (0.67 to 0.83)
randomised       (0.51)       (0.36)

Pooling all    902/208157   837/248192   0.80 (0.73 to 0.88)
trials           (0.43)       (0.34)

                  Number needed to
Trials             screen (95% CI)

Adequately     -10570 (2138 to -1522)
randomised

Inadequately      661 (506 to 950)
randomised

Pooling all      1040 (755 to 1672)
trials

Related Articles

  • New foray into cancer screening.
  • Byline: Siddhartha D. Kashyap PUNE: After doing a project with National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Nasa), city-based BioImagene is now taking cancer screening programmes to a different height world-wide, without the traditional use of microscopes and glass slides. Not only ......
  • Colorectal and Breast Cancer.
  • The risk for colorectal cancer is higher in women with a history of breast cancer, but that finding does not appear to influence the age at which to start colorectal cancer screening in these women, Dr. Andrejs Avots-Avotis said at ......
  • States Want Insurance Coverage for Cancer Screening.
  • Over 8 million people in the United States today have been diagnosed with cancer at some point in their lives. The disease chalks up a $107 billion bill every year, according to the National Institutes of Health. Treatment of breast, ......
  • Screen-detected breast ca has better outcome.
  • Women whose breast cancers were detected by screening mammography were 53% less likely to die of breast cancer over a 10- to 15-year period than those whose cancers were detected symptomatically, Donald Berry, Ph.D., and his colleagues have reported. The ......
  • Screen-detected breast ca patients live longer.
  • Women whose breast cancers were detected by screening mammography were 53% less likely to die of breast cancer over a 10- to 15-year period than those with cancers detected symptomatically. Donald Berry, Ph.D., and his colleagues have reported. The study ......
  • WHO endorses screening for breast cancer.
  • After reviewing the original studies used by Danish investigators who sparked off the controversy, experts at WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) said that although there is only a slight benefit in women under 50, mammography screening helps ......
  • Breast Ca screening before 50 doesn't cut deaths. (USPSTF Recommendations Unaffected).
  • Intensive breast cancer screening, including mammography and instructions on self-examination, did not reduce breast cancer-related mortality in women aged 40-49 in up to 16 years of follow-up, the most recent results of the Canadian National Breast Screening Study-1 show. These ......
  • Breast ca screening before age 50 doesn't cut deaths. (USPSTF Stands by its Recommendations).
  • Intensive breast cancer screening, including mammography and instructions on self-examination, did not reduce breast cancer-related mortality in women aged 40-49 in up to 16 years of follow-up, the most recent results of the Canadian National Breast Screening Study-1 show. These ......
  • Is mammography-detected breast ca less deadly?
  • Women whose breast cancers were detected IV V by screening mammography were 53% less likely to die of breast cancer over a 10- to 15-year period than those whose cancers were detected symptomatically, Donald Berry, Ph.D., and his colleagues have ......
  • Mammograms on trial: to screen or not to screen, that is the question.
  • It's been medical gospel for years: All women 50 years and older--and younger women in high-risk groups for breast cancer--should undergo mammography once every year or two. But recent reviews of the screening procedure have disagreed about whether routine mammograms ......
  • FP counseling improves cancer screening rates: CA info best from physicians.
  • ATLANTA -- Family physicians are instrumental in encouraging cancer screening compliance among middle-aged women, according to the results of a descriptive, cross--sectional survey. Of 202 women aged 50-75 years who had been seen at a university--based family practice clinic, those ......
  • Code of Denial.
  • Doctors have a dispassionate language for talking to really sick patients. But it doesn't work with people they love. Three weeks after my sister, Andrea, is diagnosed with breast cancer I am running a breast cancer screening clinic. It is ......
  • Colon Cancer Screening: Embarrassment Can Kill.
  • PHOENIX, ARIZ. -- Squeamishness is no excuse for dying. Yet thousands of lives are lost each year because Americans are embarrassed about cob cancer screening. Studies show that physicians don't emphasize it, and even when they do, patients don't follow ......
  • Expert calls for better assessment of familial risk for breast cancer. (Look for Three Generations of Disease).
  • KAUAI, HAWAII -- Many physicians do a poor job of identifying a family at risk for breast cancer, Dr. Joanna M. Cain said at a conference on obstetrics; gynecology, perinatal medicine, neonatology, and the law. "This is an area where ......
  • Cultural awareness in breast cancer fight.
  • A study of breast cancer awareness and prevention among culturally diverse groups has been launched by the nursing faculty at the University of Sydney. For Chinese-Australian women, the risk of developing breast cancer after migrating to Australia is 40% greater ......

Related Topics