Reduction in Interval Cancer Rates Following the Introduction of Two-view Mammography in the UK Breast Screening Programme

Overview

Journal Br J Cancer

Specialty Oncology

Date 2013 Dec 25

PMID 24366303

Citations 8

Authors

A Dibden

J Offman

D Parmar

J Jenkins

J Slater

K Binysh

J McSorley

S Scorfield

P Cumming

X-H Liao

M Ryan

D Harker

G Stevens

N Rogers

R Blanks

S Sellars

J Patnick

S W Duffy

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: The introduction of two-view mammography at incident (subsequent) screens in the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) has led to an increased number of cancers detected at screen. However, the effect of two-view mammography on interval cancer rates has yet to be assessed.

Methods: Routine screening and interval cancer data were collated from all screening programmes in the United Kingdom for women aged 50-64, screened between 1 April 2003 and 31 March 2005. Interval cancer rates were compared based on whether two-view mammography was in use at the last routine screen.

Results: The reduction in interval cancers following screening using two-view mammography compared with one view was 0.68 per 1,000 women screened. Overall, this suggests the introduction of two-view mammography at incident screen was accompanied by a 15-20% reduction in interval cancer rates in the NHSBSP.

Conclusion: The introduction of two-view mammography at incident screens is associated with a reduction in incidence of interval cancers. This is consistent with previous publications on a contemporaneous increase in screen-detected cancers. The results provide further evidence of the benefit of the use of two-view mammography at incident screens.

Citing Articles

Severity and risk factors of interval breast cancer in Queensland, Australia: a population-based study.

Kou K, Cameron J, Youl P, Pyke C, Chambers S, Dunn J Breast Cancer. 2023; 30(3):466-477.

PMID: 36809492 PMC: 10119209. DOI: 10.1007/s12282-023-01439-4.

Cohort profile of the Sloane Project: methodology for a prospective UK cohort study of >15 000 women with screen-detected non-invasive breast neoplasia.

Clements K, Dodwell D, Hilton B, Stevens-Harris I, Pinder S, Wallis M BMJ Open. 2022; 12(12):e061585.

PMID: 36535720 PMC: 9764674. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061585.

Considerations for Evaluating the Introduction of New Cancer Screening Technology: Use of Interval Cancers to Assess Potential Benefits and Harms.

Farber R, Houssami N, Barnes I, McGeechan K, Barratt A, Bell K Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022; 19(22).

PMID: 36429373 PMC: 9691207. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192214647.

An analysis of screen-detected invasive cancers by grade in the English breast cancer screening programme: are we failing to detect sufficient small grade 3 cancers?.

Blanks R, Wallis M, Alison R, Given-Wilson R Eur Radiol. 2020; 31(4):2548-2558.

PMID: 32997179 PMC: 7979656. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-020-07276-9.

Comparing two visualization protocols for tomosynthesis in screening: specificity and sensitivity of slabs versus planes plus slabs.

Iotti V, Rossi P, Nitrosi A, Ravaioli S, Vacondio R, Campari C Eur Radiol. 2019; 29(7):3802-3811.

PMID: 30737568 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-018-5978-x.

References

Nagtegaal I, Allgood P, Duffy S, Kearins O, O Sullivan E, Tappenden N . Prognosis and pathology of screen-detected carcinomas: how different are they?. Cancer. 2011; 117(7):1360-8. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.25613. View

Wald N, Murphy P, Major P, Parkes C, Townsend J, Frost C . UKCCCR multicentre randomised controlled trial of one and two view mammography in breast cancer screening. BMJ. 1995; 311(7014):1189-93. PMC: 2551114. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.311.7014.1189. View

Blanks R, Given-Wilson R, Moss S . Efficiency of cancer detection during routine repeat (incident) mammographic screening: two versus one view mammography. J Med Screen. 1998; 5(3):141-5. DOI: 10.1136/jms.5.3.141. View

Blanks R, Bennett R, Patnick J, Cush S, Davison C, Moss S . The effect of changing from one to two views at incident (subsequent) screens in the NHS breast screening programme in England: impact on cancer detection and recall rates. Clin Radiol. 2005; 60(6):674-80. DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2005.01.008. View

Giordano L, von Karsa L, Tomatis M, Majek O, de Wolf C, Lancucki L . Mammographic screening programmes in Europe: organization, coverage and participation. J Med Screen. 2012; 19 Suppl 1:72-82. DOI: 10.1258/jms.2012.012085. View

Warren R, Duffy S . Interval cancers as an indicator of performance in breast screening. Breast Cancer. 2000; 7(1):9-18. DOI: 10.1007/BF02967182. View

Seigneurin A, Exbrayat C, Labarere J, Colonna M . Comparison of interval breast cancer rates for two-versus single-view screening mammography: a population-based study. Breast. 2009; 18(5):284-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2009.07.007. View

Biesheuvel C, Czene K, Orgeas C, Hall P . The role of mammography screening attendance and detection mode in predicting breast cancer survival-is there added prognostic value?. Cancer Epidemiol. 2011; 35(6):545-50. DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2011.02.008. View

Domingo L, Blanch J, Servitja S, Corominas J, Murta-Nascimento C, Rueda A . Aggressiveness features and outcomes of true interval cancers: comparison between screen-detected and symptom-detected cancers. Eur J Cancer Prev. 2012; 22(1):21-8. DOI: 10.1097/CEJ.0b013e328354d324. View

10.

Ciatto S, Bernardi D, Caumo F . Evidence of interval cancer proportional incidence and review from mammography screening programs in Italy. Tumori. 2011; 97(4):419-22. DOI: 10.1177/030089161109700401. View

11.

Patnick J . NHS breast screening: the progression from one to two views. J Med Screen. 2004; 11(2):55-6. DOI: 10.1258/096914104774061001. View

12.

Bennett R, Sellars S, Moss S . Interval cancers in the NHS breast cancer screening programme in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Br J Cancer. 2011; 104(4):571-7. PMC: 3049599. DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2011.3. View

13.

Duffy S . Some current issues in breast cancer screening. J Med Screen. 2005; 12(3):128-33. DOI: 10.1258/0969141054855319. View